Zhong-Ping Chen1, Zhen-Zhen Shi1, Yun-Geng Li1, Yan Guo2, Dan Tong3. 1. Department of Radiology, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, Jilin, China. 2. Life Sciences, GE Healthcare, Shenyang, 110000, China. 3. Department of Radiology, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, Jilin, China. tongdan2012@126.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the reproducibility of quantitative computed tomography perfusion (CTP) parameters generated using different post-processing methods and identify the relative impact of subjective factors on the robustness of CTP parameters in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 80 CTP datasets from patients with AIS or transient ischemic attack (TIA) were retrospectively post-processed by two observers using different regions of interest (ROI) types, input models, and software. The CTP parameters were derived for 10 parenchymal ROIs. The intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to assess the reproducibility of the CTP parameters for various post-processing methods. The Spearman correlation test was used to detect potential relationships between software and input models. RESULTS: The ICCs with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were 0.94 (0.93-0.96), 0.94 (0.92-0.96), 0.82 (0.79-0.86), and 0.87 (0.85-0.90) for inter-reader agreement by using elliptic ROI, irregular ROI, single-input model, and dual-input model, respectively. The ICCs with 95% CI were 0.98 (0.98-0.98), 0.46 (0.43-0.50), and 0.25 (0.20-0.30) for inter-ROI type, inter-input model, and inter-software agreement, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although the CTP parameters were stable when measured using different readers with different ROI types, they varied for different input models and software. The standardization of CTP post-processing is essential to reduce variability of CTP values. KEY POINTS: • The CTP parameters derived by different readers with different ROI types have agreements that range from good to excellent. • The CTP parameters derived from different input models and software programs have poor agreement but significant correlations.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the reproducibility of quantitative computed tomography perfusion (CTP) parameters generated using different post-processing methods and identify the relative impact of subjective factors on the robustness of CTP parameters in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 80 CTP datasets from patients with AIS or transient ischemic attack (TIA) were retrospectively post-processed by two observers using different regions of interest (ROI) types, input models, and software. The CTP parameters were derived for 10 parenchymal ROIs. The intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to assess the reproducibility of the CTP parameters for various post-processing methods. The Spearman correlation test was used to detect potential relationships between software and input models. RESULTS: The ICCs with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were 0.94 (0.93-0.96), 0.94 (0.92-0.96), 0.82 (0.79-0.86), and 0.87 (0.85-0.90) for inter-reader agreement by using elliptic ROI, irregular ROI, single-input model, and dual-input model, respectively. The ICCs with 95% CI were 0.98 (0.98-0.98), 0.46 (0.43-0.50), and 0.25 (0.20-0.30) for inter-ROI type, inter-input model, and inter-software agreement, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although the CTP parameters were stable when measured using different readers with different ROI types, they varied for different input models and software. The standardization of CTP post-processing is essential to reduce variability of CTP values. KEY POINTS: • The CTP parameters derived by different readers with different ROI types have agreements that range from good to excellent. • The CTP parameters derived from different input models and software programs have poor agreement but significant correlations.
Entities:
Keywords:
Brain ischemia; Perfusion; Reproducibility of results; Tomography X-ray computed
Authors: Juan F Arenillas; Elisa Cortijo; Pablo García-Bermejo; Elad I Levy; Reza Jahan; David Liebeskind; Mayank Goyal; Jeffrey L Saver; Gregory W Albers Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2017-11-14 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: William J Powers; Alejandro A Rabinstein; Teri Ackerson; Opeolu M Adeoye; Nicholas C Bambakidis; Kyra Becker; José Biller; Michael Brown; Bart M Demaerschalk; Brian Hoh; Edward C Jauch; Chelsea S Kidwell; Thabele M Leslie-Mazwi; Bruce Ovbiagele; Phillip A Scott; Kevin N Sheth; Andrew M Southerland; Deborah V Summers; David L Tirschwell Journal: Stroke Date: 2018-01-24 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: M F Giles; G W Albers; P Amarenco; E M Arsava; A W Asimos; H Ay; D Calvet; S B Coutts; B L Cucchiara; A M Demchuk; S C Johnston; P J Kelly; A S Kim; J Labreuche; P C Lavallee; J-L Mas; A Merwick; J M Olivot; F Purroy; W D Rosamond; R Sciolla; P M Rothwell Journal: Neurology Date: 2011-08-24 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Shervin Kamalian; Shahmir Kamalian; A A Konstas; M B Maas; S Payabvash; S R Pomerantz; P W Schaefer; K L Furie; R G González; M H Lev Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-12-22 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: J Donald Easton; Jeffrey L Saver; Gregory W Albers; Mark J Alberts; Seemant Chaturvedi; Edward Feldmann; Thomas S Hatsukami; Randall T Higashida; S Claiborne Johnston; Chelsea S Kidwell; Helmi L Lutsep; Elaine Miller; Ralph L Sacco Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-05-07 Impact factor: 7.914