L Lucas1,2, F Gariel3, P Menegon4, J Aupy2,5, B Thomas3,2, T Tourdias3,2, I Sibon6,2, P Renou6. 1. From the Department of Neurology (L.L., I.S., P.R.), Stroke Unit ludovic.lucas@ch-arcachon.fr. 2. Epileptology, and Clinical Neuroscience (L.L., J.A., B.T., T.T., I.S.), University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France. 3. Departments of Neuroradiology (F.G., B.T., T.T.). 4. Neurology (??????). 5. Institut des Matériaux Jean Rouxel, (J.A.), Union Mutualiste Retraite, Centre national de la recherche scientifique, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France. 6. From the Department of Neurology (L.L., I.S., P.R.), Stroke Unit.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The clinical differentiation between acute ischemic stroke and epileptic seizure may be challenging, and making the correct diagnosis could avoid unnecessary reperfusion therapy. We examined the accuracy of CTP in discriminating epileptic seizures from acute ischemic stroke without identified arterial occlusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified consecutive patients in our emergency department who underwent CTP in the 4.5 hours following the development of an acute focal neurologic deficit who were discharged with a final diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke or epileptic seizure. RESULTS: Among 95 patients, the final diagnosis was epileptic seizure in 45 and acute ischemic stroke in 50. CTP findings were abnormal in 73% of the patients with epileptic seizure and 40% of those with acute ischemic stroke. Hyperperfusion was observed more frequently in the seizure group (36% versus 2% for acute ischemic stroke) with high specificity (98%) but low sensitivity (35%) for the diagnosis of epileptic seizure. Hypoperfusion was found in 38% of cases in each group and was not confined to a vascular territory in 24% of patients in the seizure group and 2% in the acute ischemic stroke group. The interobserver agreement was good (κ = 0.60) for hypo-, hyper-, and normoperfusion patterns and moderate (κ = 0.41) for the evaluation of vascular systematization. CONCLUSIONS: CTP patterns helped to differentiate acute ischemic stroke from epileptic seizure in a "code stroke" situation. Our results indicate that a hyperperfusion pattern, especially if not restricted to a vascular territory, may suggest reconsideration of intravenous thrombolysis therapy.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The clinical differentiation between acute ischemic stroke and epileptic seizure may be challenging, and making the correct diagnosis could avoid unnecessary reperfusion therapy. We examined the accuracy of CTP in discriminating epileptic seizures from acute ischemic stroke without identified arterial occlusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified consecutive patients in our emergency department who underwent CTP in the 4.5 hours following the development of an acute focal neurologic deficit who were discharged with a final diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke or epileptic seizure. RESULTS: Among 95 patients, the final diagnosis was epileptic seizure in 45 and acute ischemic stroke in 50. CTP findings were abnormal in 73% of the patients with epileptic seizure and 40% of those with acute ischemic stroke. Hyperperfusion was observed more frequently in the seizure group (36% versus 2% for acute ischemic stroke) with high specificity (98%) but low sensitivity (35%) for the diagnosis of epileptic seizure. Hypoperfusion was found in 38% of cases in each group and was not confined to a vascular territory in 24% of patients in the seizure group and 2% in the acute ischemic stroke group. The interobserver agreement was good (κ = 0.60) for hypo-, hyper-, and normoperfusion patterns and moderate (κ = 0.41) for the evaluation of vascular systematization. CONCLUSIONS: CTP patterns helped to differentiate acute ischemic stroke from epileptic seizure in a "code stroke" situation. Our results indicate that a hyperperfusion pattern, especially if not restricted to a vascular territory, may suggest reconsideration of intravenous thrombolysis therapy.
Authors: N Nelissen; W Van Paesschen; K Baete; K Van Laere; A Palmini; H Van Billoen; P Dupont Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2006-06-09 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: José G Merino; Marie Luby; Richard T Benson; Lisa A Davis; Amie W Hsia; Lawrence L Latour; John K Lynch; Steven Warach Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2013-05-13 Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: D D M Lin; J T Kleinman; R J Wityk; R F Gottesman; A E Hillis; A W Lee; P B Barker Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2009-02-04 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Andrew Bivard; Christopher Levi; Venkatesh Krishnamurthy; Patrick McElduff; Ferdi Miteff; Neil J Spratt; Grant Bateman; Geoffrey Donnan; Stephen Davis; Mark Parsons Journal: Brain Date: 2015-03-25 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Robert C Rennert; Arvin R Wali; Jeffrey A Steinberg; David R Santiago-Dieppa; Scott E Olson; J Scott Pannell; Alexander A Khalessi Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: E Prodi; L Danieli; C Manno; A Pagnamenta; E Pravatà; L Roccatagliata; C Städler; C W Cereda; A Cianfoni Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2021-12-30 Impact factor: 3.825