Vignan Yogendrakumar1, Tim Ramsay2,3, Dean A Fergusson2,3, Andrew M Demchuk4, Richard I Aviv5, David Rodriguez-Luna6, Carlos A Molina6, Yolanda Silva Blas7, Imanuel Dzialowski8, Adam Kobayashi9,10, Jean-Martin Boulanger11, Cheemun Lum12, Gord Gubitz13, Padma Srivastava14, Jayanta Roy15, Carlos S Kase16, Rohit Bhatia14, Michael D Hill4, Magdy Selim17, Dar Dowlatshahi18,3. 1. Ottawa Stroke Program, Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine (Neurology), University of Ottawa, Rome C2182, The Ottawa Hospital: Civic Campus, 1053 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON, K1Y4E9, Canada. vyogendrakumar@toh.on.ca. 2. Ottawa Methods Center, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. 3. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. 4. Calgary Stroke Program, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Department of Radiology, Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada. 5. Division of Neuroradiology and Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 6. Department of Neurology, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain. 7. Department of Neurology, Dr. Josep Trueta University Hospital, Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica Girona (IDIBGi) Foundation, Girona, Spain. 8. Department of Neurology, Elblandklinikum Meissen Academic Teaching Hospital of the Technische University, Dresden, Germany. 9. 2nd Department of Neurology, Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland. 10. Department of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland. 11. Department of Medicine, Charles LeMoyne Hospital, University of Sherbrooke, Longueuil, Canada. 12. Department of Diagnostic Imaging (Neuroradiology Section), University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. 13. Department of Neurology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada. 14. Department of Neurology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India. 15. Apollo Gleneagles Hospitals, Kolkata, India. 16. Department of Neurology, Boston Medical Center, Boston, USA. 17. Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Centre, Boston, USA. 18. Ottawa Stroke Program, Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine (Neurology), University of Ottawa, Rome C2182, The Ottawa Hospital: Civic Campus, 1053 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON, K1Y4E9, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The computed tomography angiography (CTA) spot sign is widely used to assess the risk of hematoma expansion following acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). However, not all patients can receive intravenous contrast nor are all hospital systems equipped with this technology. We aimed to independently validate the Hematoma Expansion Prediction (HEP) Score, an 18-point non-contrast prediction scale, in an external cohort and compare its diagnostic capability to the CTA spot sign. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the predicting hematoma growth and outcome in intracerebral hemorrhage using contrast bolus CT (PREDICT) Cohort Study. Primary outcome was significant hematoma expansion (≥ 6 mL or ≥ 33%). We generated a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve comparing the HEP score to significant expansion. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) for each score point. We determined independent predictors of significant hematoma expansion via logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 292 patients were included in primary analysis. Hematoma growth of ≥ 6 mL or ≥ 33% occurred in 94 patients (32%). The HEP score was associated with significant expansion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.30). ROC curves comparing HEP score to significant expansion had an area under the curve of 0.64 (95% CI 0.57-0.71). Youden's method showed an optimum score of 4. HEP Scores ≥ 4 (n = 100, sensitivity 49%, specificity 73%, PPV 46%, NPV 75%, aOR 1.99, 95% CI 1.09-3.64) accurately predicted significant expansion. PPV increased with higher HEP scores, but at the cost of lower sensitivity. The diagnostic characteristics of the spot sign (n = 82, Sensitivity 49%, Specificity 81%, PPV 55%, NPV 76%, aOR 2.95, 95% CI 1.61-5.42) were similar to HEP scores ≥ 4. CONCLUSION: The HEP score is predictive of significant expansion (≥ 6 mL or ≥ 33%) and is comparable to the spot sign in diagnostic accuracy. Non-contrast prediction tools may have a potential role in the recruitment of patients in future intracerebral hemorrhage trials.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The computed tomography angiography (CTA) spot sign is widely used to assess the risk of hematoma expansion following acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). However, not all patients can receive intravenous contrast nor are all hospital systems equipped with this technology. We aimed to independently validate the Hematoma Expansion Prediction (HEP) Score, an 18-point non-contrast prediction scale, in an external cohort and compare its diagnostic capability to the CTA spot sign. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the predicting hematoma growth and outcome in intracerebral hemorrhage using contrast bolus CT (PREDICT) Cohort Study. Primary outcome was significant hematoma expansion (≥ 6 mL or ≥ 33%). We generated a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve comparing the HEP score to significant expansion. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV/NPV) for each score point. We determined independent predictors of significant hematoma expansion via logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 292 patients were included in primary analysis. Hematoma growth of ≥ 6 mL or ≥ 33% occurred in 94 patients (32%). The HEP score was associated with significant expansion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.30). ROC curves comparing HEP score to significant expansion had an area under the curve of 0.64 (95% CI 0.57-0.71). Youden's method showed an optimum score of 4. HEP Scores ≥ 4 (n = 100, sensitivity 49%, specificity 73%, PPV 46%, NPV 75%, aOR 1.99, 95% CI 1.09-3.64) accurately predicted significant expansion. PPV increased with higher HEP scores, but at the cost of lower sensitivity. The diagnostic characteristics of the spot sign (n = 82, Sensitivity 49%, Specificity 81%, PPV 55%, NPV 76%, aOR 2.95, 95% CI 1.61-5.42) were similar to HEP scores ≥ 4. CONCLUSION: The HEP score is predictive of significant expansion (≥ 6 mL or ≥ 33%) and is comparable to the spot sign in diagnostic accuracy. Non-contrast prediction tools may have a potential role in the recruitment of patients in future intracerebral hemorrhage trials.
Authors: Andrew M Demchuk; Dar Dowlatshahi; David Rodriguez-Luna; Carlos A Molina; Yolanda Silva Blas; Imanuel Dzialowski; Adam Kobayashi; Jean-Martin Boulanger; Cheemun Lum; Gord Gubitz; Vasantha Padma; Jayanta Roy; Carlos S Kase; Jayme Kosior; Rohit Bhatia; Sarah Tymchuk; Suresh Subramaniam; David J Gladstone; Michael D Hill; Richard I Aviv Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2012-03-08 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Thien J Huynh; Richard I Aviv; Dar Dowlatshahi; David J Gladstone; Andreas Laupacis; Alex Kiss; Michael D Hill; Carlos A Molina; David Rodriguez-Luna; Imanuel Dzialowski; Yolanda Silva; Adam Kobayashi; Cheemun Lum; Jean-Martin Boulanger; Gord Gubitz; Rohit Bhatia; Vasantha Padma; Jayanta Roy; Carlos S Kase; Sean P Symons; Andrew M Demchuk Journal: Stroke Date: 2015-10-13 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Andrea Morotti; Dar Dowlatshahi; Gregoire Boulouis; Fahad Al-Ajlan; Andrew M Demchuk; Richard I Aviv; Liyang Yu; Kristin Schwab; Javier M Romero; M Edip Gurol; Anand Viswanathan; Christopher D Anderson; Yuchiao Chang; Steven M Greenberg; Adnan I Qureshi; Jonathan Rosand; Joshua N Goldstein Journal: Stroke Date: 2018-04-18 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Atte Meretoja; Leonid Churilov; Bruce C V Campbell; Richard I Aviv; Nawaf Yassi; Christen Barras; Peter Mitchell; Bernard Yan; Harshal Nandurkar; Christopher Bladin; Tissa Wijeratne; Neil J Spratt; Jim Jannes; Jonathan Sturm; Jayantha Rupasinghe; Jorge Zavala; Andrew Lee; Timothy Kleinig; Romesh Markus; Candice Delcourt; Neil Mahant; Mark W Parsons; Christopher Levi; Craig S Anderson; Geoffrey A Donnan; Stephen M Davis Journal: Int J Stroke Date: 2013-08-26 Impact factor: 5.266
Authors: Josser E Delgado Almandoz; Albert J Yoo; Michael J Stone; Pamela W Schaefer; Alexandra Oleinik; H Bart Brouwers; Joshua N Goldstein; Jonathan Rosand; Michael H Lev; R Gilberto Gonzalez; Javier M Romero Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-11-12 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Xia Wang; Hisatomi Arima; Rustam Al-Shahi Salman; Mark Woodward; Emma Heeley; Christian Stapf; Pablo M Lavados; Thompson Robinson; Yining Huang; Jiguang Wang; Candice Delcourt; Craig S Anderson Journal: Stroke Date: 2014-12-11 Impact factor: 7.914