BACKGROUND: We assessed whether diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) volume was associated with fluid-attenuated inversion recovery vascular hyperintensities (FVH)-DWI mismatch and functional outcome in patients with acute stroke who received endovascular therapy (EVT). METHODS: Fifty-three acute stroke patients who received EVT were enrolled. FVH-DWI mismatch, DWI volume on admission, DWI volume on follow-up, DWI volume growth, the functional outcome at 3 months (mRS) and other clinical data were collected. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to evaluate the value of DWI volume in predicting functional outcome after stroke. RESULTS: The FVH-DWI mismatch group had a smaller DWI volume on admission (13.86±19.58 vs. 65.07±52.21; t=-4.301, P=0.000), a smaller DWI volume on follow-up (29.88±33.52 vs. 112.43±87.19; t=-4.143, P=0.000), and a lower DWI volume growth (16.02±19.90 vs. 47.36±40.06; t=-3.326, P=0.003) than those of the no FVH-DWI mismatch group. The good functional outcome group had a smaller DWI volume on admission (13.30±13.26 vs. 68.56±54.28; t=-5.611, P=0.000), a smaller DWI volume on follow-up (27.65±18.80 vs. 120.25±90.37; t=-5.720, P=0.000), lower DWI volume growth (14.35±15.06 vs. 51.69±41.17; t=-4.737, P=0.001) and a higher FVH-DWI mismatch ratio (75.76% vs. 35%; t=8.647; P=0.004) than those of the poor functional outcome group. ROC analysis showed that the sensitivity and specificity of DWI volume on admission for predicting functional outcome were 65% and 96.97%, respectively (the optimal cut-off value: 33.50 mL); DWI volume on follow-up was 48.6 mL, with a sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 87.88%, respectively; DWI volume growth was 22.25 mL, with a sensitivity and specificity of 70% and 87.88%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DWI volume and DWI volume growth can provide the prognostic information of acute stroke patients after thrombectomy. 2020 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: We assessed whether diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) volume was associated with fluid-attenuated inversion recovery vascular hyperintensities (FVH)-DWI mismatch and functional outcome in patients with acute stroke who received endovascular therapy (EVT). METHODS: Fifty-three acute stroke patients who received EVT were enrolled. FVH-DWI mismatch, DWI volume on admission, DWI volume on follow-up, DWI volume growth, the functional outcome at 3 months (mRS) and other clinical data were collected. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to evaluate the value of DWI volume in predicting functional outcome after stroke. RESULTS: The FVH-DWI mismatch group had a smaller DWI volume on admission (13.86±19.58 vs. 65.07±52.21; t=-4.301, P=0.000), a smaller DWI volume on follow-up (29.88±33.52 vs. 112.43±87.19; t=-4.143, P=0.000), and a lower DWI volume growth (16.02±19.90 vs. 47.36±40.06; t=-3.326, P=0.003) than those of the no FVH-DWI mismatch group. The good functional outcome group had a smaller DWI volume on admission (13.30±13.26 vs. 68.56±54.28; t=-5.611, P=0.000), a smaller DWI volume on follow-up (27.65±18.80 vs. 120.25±90.37; t=-5.720, P=0.000), lower DWI volume growth (14.35±15.06 vs. 51.69±41.17; t=-4.737, P=0.001) and a higher FVH-DWI mismatch ratio (75.76% vs. 35%; t=8.647; P=0.004) than those of the poor functional outcome group. ROC analysis showed that the sensitivity and specificity of DWI volume on admission for predicting functional outcome were 65% and 96.97%, respectively (the optimal cut-off value: 33.50 mL); DWI volume on follow-up was 48.6 mL, with a sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 87.88%, respectively; DWI volume growth was 22.25 mL, with a sensitivity and specificity of 70% and 87.88%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DWI volume and DWI volume growth can provide the prognostic information of acute stroke patients after thrombectomy. 2020 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
Entities:
Keywords:
Stroke; diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI); magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); prognosis
Authors: Simon Jung; Roland Wiest; Jan Gralla; Richard McKinley; Heinrich Mattle; David Liebeskind Journal: Swiss Med Wkly Date: 2017-12-11 Impact factor: 2.193
Authors: Claus Z Simonsen; Mette H Madsen; Marie L Schmitz; Irene K Mikkelsen; Marc Fisher; Grethe Andersen Journal: Stroke Date: 2014-11-11 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Michael Mlynash; Maarten G Lansberg; Deidre A De Silva; Jun Lee; Soren Christensen; Matus Straka; Bruce C V Campbell; Roland Bammer; Jean-Marc Olivot; Patricia Desmond; Geoffrey A Donnan; Stephen M Davis; Gregory W Albers Journal: Stroke Date: 2011-04-07 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: M Hohenhaus; W U Schmidt; P Brunecker; C Xu; B Hotter; M Rozanski; J B Fiebach; G J Jungehülsing Journal: Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2012-06-28 Impact factor: 2.762
Authors: Randall T Higashida; Anthony J Furlan; Heidi Roberts; Thomas Tomsick; Buddy Connors; John Barr; William Dillon; Steven Warach; Joseph Broderick; Barbara Tilley; David Sacks Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-07-17 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Albert J Yoo; Luis A Verduzco; Pamela W Schaefer; Joshua A Hirsch; James D Rabinov; R Gilberto González Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-04-09 Impact factor: 7.914