Back to Search Start Over

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

Authors :
Gensicke H
Evans JW
Al Ajlan FS
Dowlatshahi D
Najm M
Calleja AL
Puig J
Sohn SL
Ahn SH
Poppe AY
Mikulik R
Asdaghi N
Field TS
Jin A
Asil T
Boulanger JM
Hill MD
Goyal M
Demchuk AM
Menon BK
Source :
Neuroradiology [Neuroradiology] 2020 Mar; Vol. 62 (3), pp. 301-306. Date of Electronic Publication: 2019 Nov 12.
Publication Year :
2020

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.<br />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 (ΔHUmax); [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).<br />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 HU <subscript>max</subscript> ≥ 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 HU <subscript>max</subscript> > 89 vs. 16.8% (95%CI 13.0-20.6) when HU <subscript>max</subscript> ≤ 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).<br />Conclusion: Simple methods that measure thrombus permeability are as reliable as complex image processing methods in discriminating recanalizers from non-recanalizers.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1432-1920
Volume :
62
Issue :
3
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Neuroradiology
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
31713667
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-019-02320-y