A Rodríguez-Vázquez1, C Laredo1, A Renú1,2,3, S Rudilosso1,2, L Llull1,2,3, S Amaro1,2,3, V Obach1,2,3, V Vera1, A Páez4, L Oleaga4, X Urra5,2,3, Á Chamorro1,2,3. 1. From the Comprehensive Stroke Center (A.R.-V., C.L., A.R., S.R., L.L., S.A., V.O., V.V., X.U., A.C.), Functional Unit of Cerebrovascular Diseases. 2. Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (A.R., S.R., L.L., S.A., V.O., X.U., A.C.), Barcelona, Spain. 3. University of Barcelona (A.R., L.L. S.A., V.O., X.U., A.C.), Barcelona, Spain. 4. Radiology Department (A.P., L.O.), Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain. 5. From the Comprehensive Stroke Center (A.R.-V., C.L., A.R., S.R., L.L., S.A., V.O., V.V., X.U., A.C.), Functional Unit of Cerebrovascular Diseases xurra@clinic.cat.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: CTP allows estimating ischemic core in patients with acute stroke. However, these estimations have limited accuracy compared with MR imaging. We studied the effect of applying WM- and GM-specific thresholds and analyzed the infarct growth from baseline imaging to reperfusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-center cohort of consecutive patients (n = 113) with witnessed strokes due to proximal carotid territory occlusions with baseline CT perfusion, complete reperfusion, and follow-up DWI. We segmented GM and WM, coregistered CTP with DWI, and compared the accuracy of the different predictions for each voxel on DWI through receiver operating characteristic analysis. We assessed the yield of different relative CBF thresholds to predict the final infarct volume and an estimated infarct growth-corrected volume (subtracting the infarct growth from baseline imaging to complete reperfusion) for a single relative CBF threshold and GM- and WM-specific thresholds. RESULTS: The fixed threshold underestimated lesions in GM and overestimated them in WM. Double GM- and WM-specific thresholds of relative CBF were superior to fixed thresholds in predicting infarcted voxels. The closest estimations of the infarct on DWI were based on a relative CBF of 25% for a single threshold, 35% for GM, and 20% for WM, and they decreased when correcting for infarct growth: 20% for a single threshold, 25% for GM, and 15% for WM. The combination of 25% for GM and 15% for WM yielded the best prediction. CONCLUSIONS: GM- and WM-specific thresholds result in different estimations of ischemic core in CTP and increase the global accuracy. More restrictive thresholds better estimate the actual extent of the infarcted tissue.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: CTP allows estimating ischemic core in patients with acute stroke. However, these estimations have limited accuracy compared with MR imaging. We studied the effect of applying WM- and GM-specific thresholds and analyzed the infarct growth from baseline imaging to reperfusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-center cohort of consecutive patients (n = 113) with witnessed strokes due to proximal carotid territory occlusions with baseline CT perfusion, complete reperfusion, and follow-up DWI. We segmented GM and WM, coregistered CTP with DWI, and compared the accuracy of the different predictions for each voxel on DWI through receiver operating characteristic analysis. We assessed the yield of different relative CBF thresholds to predict the final infarct volume and an estimated infarct growth-corrected volume (subtracting the infarct growth from baseline imaging to complete reperfusion) for a single relative CBF threshold and GM- and WM-specific thresholds. RESULTS: The fixed threshold underestimated lesions in GM and overestimated them in WM. Double GM- and WM-specific thresholds of relative CBF were superior to fixed thresholds in predicting infarcted voxels. The closest estimations of the infarct on DWI were based on a relative CBF of 25% for a single threshold, 35% for GM, and 20% for WM, and they decreased when correcting for infarct growth: 20% for a single threshold, 25% for GM, and 15% for WM. The combination of 25% for GM and 15% for WM yielded the best prediction. CONCLUSIONS: GM- and WM-specific thresholds result in different estimations of ischemic core in CTP and increase the global accuracy. More restrictive thresholds better estimate the actual extent of the infarcted tissue.
Authors: Christopher D d'Esterre; Mari E Boesen; Seong Hwan Ahn; Pooneh Pordeli; Mohamed Najm; Priyanka Minhas; Paniz Davari; Enrico Fainardi; Marta Rubiera; Alexander V Khaw; Andrea Zini; Richard Frayne; Michael D Hill; Andrew M Demchuk; Tolulope T Sajobi; Nils D Forkert; Mayank Goyal; Ting Y Lee; Bijoy K Menon Journal: Stroke Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: John Benson; Seyedmehdi Payabvash; Pascal Salazar; Bharathi Jagadeesan; Christopher S Palmer; Charles L Truwit; Alexander M McKinney Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2015-01-12 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Aimen S Kasasbeh; Søren Christensen; Mark W Parsons; Bruce Campbell; Gregory W Albers; Maarten G Lansberg Journal: Stroke Date: 2019-05-16 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Elizabeth A Noser; Hashem M Shaltoni; Christiana E Hall; Andrei V Alexandrov; Zsolt Garami; Edwin D Cacayorin; Joon K Song; James C Grotta; Morgan S Campbell Journal: Stroke Date: 2004-12-29 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Jelle Demeestere; Carlos Garcia-Esperon; Pablo Garcia-Bermejo; Fouke Ombelet; Patrick McElduff; Andrew Bivard; Mark Parsons; Christopher Levi Journal: Neurology Date: 2017-05-17 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Jan W Hoving; Henk A Marquering; Charles B L M Majoie; Nawaf Yassi; Gagan Sharma; David S Liebeskind; Aad van der Lugt; Yvo B Roos; Wim van Zwam; Robert J van Oostenbrugge; Mayank Goyal; Jeffrey L Saver; Tudor G Jovin; Gregory W Albers; Antoni Davalos; Michael D Hill; Andrew M Demchuk; Serge Bracard; Francis Guillemin; Keith W Muir; Philip White; Peter J Mitchell; Geoffrey A Donnan; Stephen M Davis; Bruce C V Campbell Journal: Stroke Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 7.914