J 2020

Comparison of different methods of thrombus permeability measurement and impact on recanalization in the INTERRSeCT multinational multicenter prospective cohort study

GENSICKE, H., J. W. EVANS, F. S. AL AJLAN, D. DOWLATSHAHI, M. NAJM et. al.

Basic information

Original name

Comparison of different methods of thrombus permeability measurement and impact on recanalization in the INTERRSeCT multinational multicenter prospective cohort study

Authors

GENSICKE, H. (124 Canada, guarantor), J. W. EVANS (124 Canada), F. S. AL AJLAN (124 Canada), D. DOWLATSHAHI (124 Canada), M. NAJM (124 Canada), A. L. CALLEJA (724 Spain), J. PUIG (724 Spain), S .L. SOHN (410 Republic of Korea), S. H. AHN (410 Republic of Korea), A. Y. POPPE (124 Canada), Robert MIKULÍK (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), N. ASDAGHI (840 United States of America), T. S. FIELD (124 Canada), A. JIN (124 Canada), T. ASIL (792 Turkey), J. M. BOULANGER (124 Canada), M. D. HILL (124 Canada), M. GOYAL (124 Canada), A. M. DEMCHUK (124 Canada) and B. K. MENON (124 Canada)

Edition

NEURORADIOLOGY, NEW YORK, SPRINGER, 2020, 0028-3940

Other information

Language

English

Type of outcome

Článek v odborném periodiku

Field of Study

30103 Neurosciences

Country of publisher

United States of America

Confidentiality degree

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

References:

Impact factor

Impact factor: 2.804

RIV identification code

RIV/00216224:14110/20:00115996

Organization unit

Faculty of Medicine

UT WoS

000495942400003

Keywords in English

Acute ischemic stroke; Thrombus permeability; Recanalization therapies; NCCT; CTA

Tags

Tags

International impact, Reviewed
Změněno: 31/8/2020 12:13, Mgr. Tereza Miškechová

Abstract

V originále

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 (Delta HUmax); [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.