Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1/1710
Title: Comparison of different methods of thrombus permeability measurement and impact on recanalization in the INTERRSeCT multinational multicenter prospective cohort study
Authors: Evans, James W ;Gensicke, H.;Al-Ajlan, F.S.;Dowlatshahi, D.;Najm, M.;Calleja, A.L.;Puig, J.;Sohn, S.L.;Ahn, S.H.;Poppe, A.Y.;Mikulik, R.;Asdaghi, N.;Field, T.S.;Jin, A.;Asil, T.;Boulanger, J.M.;Hill, M.D.;Goyal, M.;Demchuk, A.M.;Menon, B.K.
Affliation: Central Coast Local Health District
Gosford Hospital
Issue Date: Nov-2019
Source: 62(3):301-306
Journal title: Neuroradiology
Department: Neuroscience
Abstract: PURPOSE: To compare the association of different measures of intracranial thrombus permeability on non-contrast computerized tomography (NCCT) and computed tomography angiography (CTA) with recanalization with or without intravenous alteplase. METHODS: Patients with anterior circulation occlusion from the INTERRSeCT study were included. Thrombus permeability was measured on non-contrast CT and CTA using the following methods: [1] automated method, mean attenuation increase on co-registered thin (< 2.5 mm) CTA/NCCT; [2] semi-automated method, maximum attenuation increase on non-registered CTA/NCCT (DeltaHUmax); [3] manual method, maximum attenuation on CTA (HUmax); and [4] visual method, residual flow grade. Primary outcome was recanalization with intravenous alteplase on the revised AOL scale (2b/3). Regression models were compared using C-statistic, Akaike (AIC), and Bayesian information criterion (BIC). RESULTS: Four hundred eighty patients were included in this analysis. Statistical models using methods 2, 3, and 4 were similar in their ability to discriminate recanalizers from non-recanalizers (C-statistic 0.667, 0.683, and 0.634, respectively); method 3 had the least information loss (AIC = 483.8; BIC = 492.2). A HUmax >/= 89 measured with method 3 provided optimal sensitivity and specificity in discriminating recanalizers from non-recanalizers [recanalization 55.4% (95%CI 46.2-64.6) when HUmax > 89 vs. 16.8% (95%CI 13.0-20.6) when HUmax </= 89]. In sensitivity analyses restricted to patients with co-registered CTA/NCCT (n = 88), methods 1-4 predicted recanalization similarly (C-statistic 0.641, 0.688, 0.640, 0.648, respectively) with Method 2 having the least information loss (AIC 104.8, BIC 109.8). CONCLUSION: Simple methods that measure thrombus permeability are as reliable as complex image processing methods in discriminating recanalizers from non-recanalizers.
URI: https://elibrary.cclhd.health.nsw.gov.au/cclhdjspui/handle/1/1710
DOI: 10.1007/s00234-019-02320-y
Pubmed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31713667
ISSN: 0028-3940
Publicaton type: Journal Article
Keywords: Neurology
Stroke
Study or Trial: Prospective Cohort Study
Appears in Collections:Neurology

Show full item record

Page view(s)

18
checked on Jan 28, 2023

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.