E Kellner1, A Rau2, T Demerath2, M Reisert3, H Urbach2. 1. From the Department of Radiology, Medical Physics (E.K., M.R.), Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany elias.kellner@uniklinik-freiburg.de. 2. Department of Neuroradiology (A.R., T.D., H.U.), Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 3. From the Department of Radiology, Medical Physics (E.K., M.R.), Faculty of Medicine, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Whether CTP is performed before or after CTA varies within multimodal CT stroke protocols. CTA after CTP might show venous filling, and CTP metrics might be disturbed by prior CTA. Therefore, we compared CTP metrics conducted before and after CTA in a large cohort of patients with stroke and analyzed interferences of the CTA bolus with the CTP measurement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 1980 patients (368 patients with CTP performed before CTA [group A] versus 1612 patients with CTP performed after [group B]) in a retrospective study. Mean curves, histograms of CTP baseline Hounsfield units, CBF, CBV, time-to-maximum, hypoperfusion, and core volumes were calculated using the software VEOcore. CTA and CTP interferences were analyzed, and a detection and correction method was proposed. RESULTS: Mean CTP baseline values were significantly different in both groups (41 versus 45 HU within the groups A and B, respectively). However, perfusion metrics, hypoperfusion, and core volumes yielded no significant differences. In 49 patients, the descending flank of the CTA bolus interfered with the baseline of the CTP measurement, leading to erroneously low CBV values. These errors vanished when a correction method was applied. CONCLUSIONS: CTP can be reliably performed after CTA without a relevant net effect on perfusion metrics. However, when measuring CTP after CTA, either a short pause on the order of 30 seconds should be observed or an appropriate correction method should be applied. It may help to avoid excluding patients from mechanical thrombectomy by overestimating infarct cores.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Whether CTP is performed before or after CTA varies within multimodal CT stroke protocols. CTA after CTP might show venous filling, and CTP metrics might be disturbed by prior CTA. Therefore, we compared CTP metrics conducted before and after CTA in a large cohort of patients with stroke and analyzed interferences of the CTA bolus with the CTP measurement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 1980 patients (368 patients with CTP performed before CTA [group A] versus 1612 patients with CTP performed after [group B]) in a retrospective study. Mean curves, histograms of CTP baseline Hounsfield units, CBF, CBV, time-to-maximum, hypoperfusion, and core volumes were calculated using the software VEOcore. CTA and CTP interferences were analyzed, and a detection and correction method was proposed. RESULTS: Mean CTP baseline values were significantly different in both groups (41 versus 45 HU within the groups A and B, respectively). However, perfusion metrics, hypoperfusion, and core volumes yielded no significant differences. In 49 patients, the descending flank of the CTA bolus interfered with the baseline of the CTP measurement, leading to erroneously low CBV values. These errors vanished when a correction method was applied. CONCLUSIONS: CTP can be reliably performed after CTA without a relevant net effect on perfusion metrics. However, when measuring CTP after CTA, either a short pause on the order of 30 seconds should be observed or an appropriate correction method should be applied. It may help to avoid excluding patients from mechanical thrombectomy by overestimating infarct cores.
Authors: Gregory W Albers; Michael P Marks; Stephanie Kemp; Soren Christensen; Jenny P Tsai; Santiago Ortega-Gutierrez; Ryan A McTaggart; Michel T Torbey; May Kim-Tenser; Thabele Leslie-Mazwi; Amrou Sarraj; Scott E Kasner; Sameer A Ansari; Sharon D Yeatts; Scott Hamilton; Michael Mlynash; Jeremy J Heit; Greg Zaharchuk; Sun Kim; Janice Carrozzella; Yuko Y Palesch; Andrew M Demchuk; Roland Bammer; Philip W Lavori; Joseph P Broderick; Maarten G Lansberg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-01-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Raul G Nogueira; Ashutosh P Jadhav; Diogo C Haussen; Alain Bonafe; Ronald F Budzik; Parita Bhuva; Dileep R Yavagal; Marc Ribo; Christophe Cognard; Ricardo A Hanel; Cathy A Sila; Ameer E Hassan; Monica Millan; Elad I Levy; Peter Mitchell; Michael Chen; Joey D English; Qaisar A Shah; Frank L Silver; Vitor M Pereira; Brijesh P Mehta; Blaise W Baxter; Michael G Abraham; Pedro Cardona; Erol Veznedaroglu; Frank R Hellinger; Lei Feng; Jawad F Kirmani; Demetrius K Lopes; Brian T Jankowitz; Michael R Frankel; Vincent Costalat; Nirav A Vora; Albert J Yoo; Amer M Malik; Anthony J Furlan; Marta Rubiera; Amin Aghaebrahim; Jean-Marc Olivot; Wondwossen G Tekle; Ryan Shields; Todd Graves; Roger J Lewis; Wade S Smith; David S Liebeskind; Jeffrey L Saver; Tudor G Jovin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-11-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: A Z Copelan; E R Smith; G T Drocton; K H Narsinh; D Murph; R S Khangura; Z J Hartley; A A Abla; W P Dillon; C F Dowd; R T Higashida; V V Halbach; S W Hetts; D L Cooke; K Keenan; J Nelson; D Mccoy; M Ciano; M R Amans Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-11-19 Impact factor: 3.825
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: 2019-10-30 Impact factor: 7.914