| Literature DB >> 34102759 |
Young Dae Kim1, Hyo Suk Nam1, Joonsang Yoo2,3, Hyungjong Park1,2, Sung-Il Sohn2, Jeong-Ho Hong2, Byung Moon Kim4, Dong Joon Kim4, Oh Young Bang5, Woo-Keun Seo5, Jong-Won Chung5, Kyung-Yul Lee6, Yo Han Jung6,7, Hye Sun Lee8, Seong Hwan Ahn9, Dong Hoon Shin10, Hye-Yeon Choi11, Han-Jin Cho12, Jang-Hyun Baek13,14, Gyu Sik Kim15, Kwon-Duk Seo15,16, Seo Hyun Kim17, Tae-Jin Song18,19, Jinkwon Kim3,20, Sang Won Han21, Joong Hyun Park21, Sung Ik Lee16, JoonNyung Heo1, Jin Kyo Choi1,4, Ji Hoe Heo1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND ANDEntities:
Keywords: Ischemia; Reperfusion; Stroke; Thrombolysis; Thrombosis
Year: 2021 PMID: 34102759 PMCID: PMC8189851 DOI: 10.5853/jos.2020.03622
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Stroke ISSN: 2287-6391 Impact factor: 6.967
Figure 1.Patient selection: (A) derivation cohort, (B) validation cohort. MCA, middle cerebral artery; ICA, internal carotid artery; IV t-PA, intravenous tissue plasminogen activator; SECRET, Selection Criteria in Endovascular Thrombectomy and Thrombolytic Therapy; CT, computed tomography.
Baseline characteristics of the derivation and external validation cohorts
| Characteristic | Derivation cohort (n=97) | Validation cohort (n=76) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (yr) | 67.9±12.8 | 66.9±10.8 | 0.620 |
| Male sex | 44 (45.4) | 39 (51.3) | 0.437 |
| Hypertension | 58 (59.8) | 54 (71.1) | 0.124 |
| Diabetes | 27 (27.8) | 40 (52.6) | 0.001 |
| Dyslipidemia | 28 (28.9) | 34 (44.7) | 0.031 |
| Atrial fibrillation | 46 (47.4) | 46 (60.5) | 0.086 |
| Previous stroke | 15 (15.5) | 15 (19.7) | 0.461 |
| Premorbid disability | 1 (1.0) | 3 (3.9) | 0.321 |
| Sequential endovascular treatment | 73 (75.3) | 59 (77.6) | 0.716 |
| Occlusion site | 0.727 | ||
| Distal ICA±M1 | 21 (21.6) | 20 (26.3) | |
| MCA M1 | 59 (60.8) | 42 (55.3) | |
| MCA M2 | 17 (17.5) | 14 (18.4) | |
| Initial NIHSS score | 15 (11–18) | 14 (9–19) | 0.736 |
| ASPECT score | 8 (7–9) | 8 (7–9) | 0.306 |
| t-PA dose (mg) | 54.3±12.7 | 54±10 | 0.887 |
| Onset to t-PA | 123.1±66.2 | 123.4±80.1 | 0.974 |
| Onset to CT | 102.3±65.7 | 100.2±78.4 | 0.843 |
| t-PA to follow-up imaging | 65.1±49.1 | 55.9±38.1 | 0.181 |
| Thrombus volume (mm3) | 124.7±102.1 | 144.3±122.8 | 0.253 |
| Thrombus HU | 51.5±3.5 | 52.6±3.6 | 0.038 |
| Good collaterals, 3 vs. 0–2 | 31 (32.0) | 15 (19.7) | 0.071 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation, number (%), or median (interquartile range).
ICA, internal carotid artery; MCA, middle cerebral artery; NIHSS, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; ASPECT, Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography; t-PA, tissue plasminogen activator; CT, computed tomography; HU, Hounsfield unit.
Univariable and multivariable analyses for early recanalization
| Variable | Univariable analysis | Multivariable analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Odds ratio (95% CI) | Odds ratio (95% CI) | |||
| Age | 0.968 (0.929–1.008) | 0.117 | ||
| Male sex | 0.496 (0.162–1.524) | 0.221 | ||
| Hypertension | 3.130 (0.821–11.934) | 0.095 | ||
| Diabetes | 1.364 (0.419–4.435) | 0.606 | ||
| Dyslipidemia | 0.570 (0.148–2.198) | 0.414 | ||
| Atrial fibrillation | 0.700 (0.228–2.146) | 0.533 | ||
| Previous stroke | 2.347 (0.634–8.688) | 0.201 | ||
| Premorbid disability | 0.000 (0.000–NA) | 1.000 | ||
| Initial NIHSS score | 0.882 (0.797–0.976) | 0.015 | 0.963 (0.852–1.089) | 0.551 |
| ASPECT score | 1.458 (0.933–2.279) | 0.098 | ||
| t-PA dose (mg) | 1.010 (0.965–1.056) | 0.670 | ||
| Onset to t-PA | 0.999 (0.991–1.008) | 0.886 | ||
| Onset to CT | 1.000 (0.992–1.009) | 0.928 | ||
| t-PA to follow-up imaging | 1.004 (0.995–1.013) | 0.394 | ||
| Clot volume (mm3) | 0.976 (0.961–0.992) | 0.004 | 0.979 (0.961–0.997) | 0.020 |
| Clot HU | 0.873 (0.744–1.023) | 0.094 | ||
| Good collateral, 3 vs. 0–2 | 8.525 (2.441–29.769) | 0.001 | 6.129 (1.592–23.594) | 0.008 |
CI, confidence interval; NA, not applicable; NIHSS, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; ASPECT, Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography; t-PA, tissue plasminogen activator; CT, computed tomography; HU, Hounsfield unit.
Figure 2.Comparison of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves between two models (A) and decision curve analysis (B). (A) ROC curves of the derivation cohorts and area under the curve (AUC) values (model using only clot volume, 0.819; model using both clot volume and good collaterals, 0.876). (B) Decision curve analysis showing that the model using both clot volume and good collaterals was the preferred model.
Figure 3.Assessment of discrimination and calibration in the derivation cohort (A, B) and the validation cohort (C, D). (A) Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of the derivation cohort and area under the curve (AUC) values (AUC, 0.876; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.802 to 0.950). (B) Calibration plot per quartile of the scores in the derivation cohort. (C) ROC curves of the validation cohort and AUC values (AUC, 0.949; 95% CI, 0.886 to 1.000). (D) Calibration plot per quartile of the scores in the validation cohort.
Figure 4.Nomogram for predicting successful recanalization within 1 hour after intravenous tissue plasminogen activator.