Search

Purpose: To determine whether spectral detector CT (SDCT) with a plain non-enhanced monochromatic CT, a water-weighted image after iodine removal, an iodine map, and Mono energetic images changes the diagnosis and classification of intracranial hemorrhage based on single energy CT after endovascular treatment (EVT) for ischemic stroke. Methods: Two readers evaluated single energy and SD CT data collected from 63 patients within one week after EVT. They diagnosed ICH or contrast staining, and graded ICH according to the Heidelberg and Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis in Stroke–Monitoring Study (SITS-MOST) classification. Differences in diagnosis between single energy and SD CT were tested with Pearson's chi-squared test. Diagnostic values of single energy CT were calculated. Interrater agreement was based on Cohen’s Kappa. Results: When spectral data were added to single energy CT, the diagnosis of ICH changed in 8 CT scans (13%): in 4, the diagnosis of ICH was rejected and in 4, initially undetected ICH was diagnosed. In an additional 3 patients, the ICH grade was modified. CT alone had 88% sensitivity, 87% specificity, 88% positive diagnostic value, 87% negative diagnostic value, and 87% overall accuracy for ICH compared to SDCT. Interreader agreement on the presence of ICH was 0.84 (95% CI 0.51–0.86) for spectral CT and 0.84 (95% CI 0.73–0.97) for single energy CT. Conclusion: SD CT after endovascular treatment contributes to the distinction between intracranial hemorrhage and contrast staining.

To determine whether spectral detector CT (SDCT) with a plain non-enhanced monochromatic CT, a water-weighted image after iodine removal, an iodine map, and Mono energetic images changes the diagnosis and classification of intracranial hemorrhage based on single energy CT after endovascular treatment (EVT) for ischemic stroke.Two readers evaluated single energy and SD CT data collected from 63 patients within one week after EVT. They diagnosed ICH or contrast staining, and graded ICH according to the Heidelberg and Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis in Stroke-Monitoring Study (SITS-MOST) classification. Differences in diagnosis between single energy and SD CT were tested with Pearson's chi-squared test. Diagnostic values of single energy CT were calculated. Interrater agreement was based on Cohen's Kappa.When spectral data were added to single energy CT, the diagnosis of ICH changed in 8 CT scans (13%): in 4, the diagnosis of ICH was rejected and in 4, initially undetected ICH was diagnosed. In an additional 3 patients, the ICH grade was modified. CT alone had 88% sensitivity, 87% specificity, 88% positive diagnostic value, 87% negative diagnostic value, and 87% overall accuracy for ICH compared to SDCT. Interreader agreement on the presence of ICH was 0.84 (95% CI 0.51-0.86) for spectral CT and 0.84 (95% CI 0.73-0.97) for single energy CT.SD CT after endovascular treatment contributes to the distinction between intracranial hemorrhage and contrast staining.

PURPOSE: To assess the relationship between heart valve history and susceptibility artifacts at magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the brain in patients with Bjork-Shiley convexoconcave (BSCC) valves. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MR images of the brain were obtained in 58 patients with prosthetic heart valves: 20 patients had BSCC valve replacements, and 38 had other types of heart valves. Two experienced neuroradiologists determined the presence or absence of susceptibility artifacts in a consensus reading. Artifacts were defined as characteristic black spots that were visible on T2*-weighted gradient-echo MR images. The statuses of the 20 explanted BSCC valves-specifically, whether they were intact or had an outlet strut fracture (OSF) or a single-leg fracture (SLF)-had been determined earlier. Number of artifacts seen at brain MR imaging was correlated with explanted valve status, and differences were analyzed with nonparametric statistical tests. RESULTS: Significantly more patients with BSCC valves (17 [85%] of 20 patients) than patients with other types of prosthetic valves (18 [47%] of 38 patients) had susceptibility artifacts at MR imaging (P = .005). BSCC valve OSFs were associated with a significantly higher number of artifacts than were intact BSCC valves (P = .01). No significant relationship between SLF and number of artifacts was observed. CONCLUSION: Susceptibility artifacts at brain MR imaging are not restricted to patients with BSCC valves. These artifacts can be seen on images obtained in patients with various other types of fractured and intact prosthetic heart valves. (C) RSNA, 2004