Accuracy of CT perfusion-predicted core in the late window.

J. Vidovich, S. Voleti, Bin Zhang, Cody Stephens, Aakanksha Sriwastwa, Yasmin N. Aziz, Brendan Corcoran, V. Khandwala, Eva A. Mistry, P. Khatri, Lily L. Wang, A. Vagal
{"title":"Accuracy of CT perfusion-predicted core in the late window.","authors":"J. Vidovich, S. Voleti, Bin Zhang, Cody Stephens, Aakanksha Sriwastwa, Yasmin N. Aziz, Brendan Corcoran, V. Khandwala, Eva A. Mistry, P. Khatri, Lily L. Wang, A. Vagal","doi":"10.1177/15910199221133863","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE\nRecent endovascular trials have spurred a paradigm shift toward routine use of CT perfusion (CTP) for decision-making in acute ischemic stroke. CTP use in the late window, however, remains under evaluation. Our objective was to assess the accuracy of CTP-predicted core in the late window.\n\n\nMETHODS\nIn a retrospective review of our prospectively identified stroke registry at a single, comprehensive stroke center, we included patients with anterior large vessel occlusions presenting within the 6-24 h window who underwent baseline CTP evaluation and achieved TICI2b or TICI3 reperfusion on endovascular treatment. We recorded baseline CTP-predicted core volumes at relative cerebral blood flow (CBF) thresholds of <30% <34%, and <38% using RAPID software. Final infarct volumes (FIV) were calculated using follow up MRI and CT, obtained within 72 h after stroke onset.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOf the eligible patients, 134 met our inclusion criteria. Mean FIV was 39.5 (SD 49.6). Median CTP to reperfusion time was 93.5 min. Median absolute differences between CTP-predicted core and FIV were 14.7, 14.9, and 16.0 ml at <30%, <34%, and <38%, respectively. Correlation between CTP-predicted ischemic cores and FIV was moderate and statistically significant at all thresholds: r = 0.43 (p <0.001), r = 0.43 (p <0.001), and r = 0.42 (p <0.001) at the <30%, <34%, and <38% cutoffs, respectively.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nCTP cores in the 6-24 h period underestimate FIV, especially with larger infarcts. CTP-predicted core volumes in the late window show moderate positive correlation with FIV.","PeriodicalId":126264,"journal":{"name":"Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences","volume":"80 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199221133863","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Recent endovascular trials have spurred a paradigm shift toward routine use of CT perfusion (CTP) for decision-making in acute ischemic stroke. CTP use in the late window, however, remains under evaluation. Our objective was to assess the accuracy of CTP-predicted core in the late window. METHODS In a retrospective review of our prospectively identified stroke registry at a single, comprehensive stroke center, we included patients with anterior large vessel occlusions presenting within the 6-24 h window who underwent baseline CTP evaluation and achieved TICI2b or TICI3 reperfusion on endovascular treatment. We recorded baseline CTP-predicted core volumes at relative cerebral blood flow (CBF) thresholds of <30% <34%, and <38% using RAPID software. Final infarct volumes (FIV) were calculated using follow up MRI and CT, obtained within 72 h after stroke onset. RESULTS Of the eligible patients, 134 met our inclusion criteria. Mean FIV was 39.5 (SD 49.6). Median CTP to reperfusion time was 93.5 min. Median absolute differences between CTP-predicted core and FIV were 14.7, 14.9, and 16.0 ml at <30%, <34%, and <38%, respectively. Correlation between CTP-predicted ischemic cores and FIV was moderate and statistically significant at all thresholds: r = 0.43 (p <0.001), r = 0.43 (p <0.001), and r = 0.42 (p <0.001) at the <30%, <34%, and <38% cutoffs, respectively. CONCLUSION CTP cores in the 6-24 h period underestimate FIV, especially with larger infarcts. CTP-predicted core volumes in the late window show moderate positive correlation with FIV.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
CT灌注预测后窗岩心的准确性。
背景和目的最近的血管内试验已经促使常规使用CT灌注(CTP)作为急性缺血性卒中决策的范式转变。然而,CTP在后期窗口的使用仍在评估中。我们的目的是评估ctp预测后窗岩心的准确性。方法回顾性分析了我们在一个单一的综合卒中中心前瞻性卒中登记,我们纳入了在6-24小时窗口内出现前大血管闭塞的患者,这些患者接受了基线CTP评估,并在血管内治疗中达到了ici2b或ici3再灌注。我们使用RAPID软件在相对脑血流量(CBF)阈值<30% <34%和<38%时记录基线ctp预测的核心体积。最终梗死体积(FIV)通过随访MRI和CT计算,在卒中发作后72小时内获得。结果134例患者符合纳入标准。平均FIV为39.5 (SD 49.6)。中位CTP至再灌注时间为93.5 min。ctp预测的核心和FIV之间的绝对中位数差异分别为14.7、14.9和16.0 ml,分别<30%、<34%和<38%。ctp预测的缺血核心与FIV之间的相关性中等,在所有阈值下均具有统计学意义:r = 0.43 (p <0.001), r = 0.43 (p <0.001), r = 0.42 (p <0.001),分别为<30%,<34%和<38%的临界值。结论ctp核在6 ~ 24 h期间低估FIV,尤其是梗死面积较大时。ctp预测的晚窗岩心体积与FIV呈中等正相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Coaxial Method of PTA Balloon and Aspiration catheter using the delivery wire of a stent retriever for tandem occlusion: CoMBAt tandem occlusion. Safety and efficacy of endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke of large-vessel occlusion beyond the time window based on imaging evaluation. FRED X flow diverter for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: Two-center experience and mini-review of the literature. Safety and efficacy of transvenous embolization of cerebrospinal fluid-venous fistula in patients with spontaneous intracranial hypotension. The resolute Onyx in TIA management (ROTIA).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1