Clinical uncertainty in large vessel occlusion ischemic stroke: does automated perfusion imaging make a difference? An intra-rater and inter-rater agreement study

BackgroundLimited research exists regarding the impact of neuroimaging on endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) decisions for late-window cases of large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke.ObjectiveT0 assess whether perfusion CT imaging: (1) alters the proportion of recommendations for EVT, and (2) enhances the reliability of EVT decision-making compared with non-contrast CT and CT angiography.MethodsWe conducted a survey using 30 patients drawn from an institutional database of 3144 acute stroke cases. These were presented to 29 Canadian physicians with and without perfusion imaging. We used non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals and difference in agreement classification as criteria to suggest a difference between the Gwet AC1 statistics (κG).ResultsThe percentage of EVT recommendations differed by 1.1% with or without perfusion imaging. Individual decisions changed in 21.4% of cases (11.3% against EVT and 10.1% in favor). Inter-rater agreement (κG) among the 29 raters was similar between non-perfusion and perfusion CT neuroimaging (κG=0.487; 95% CI 0.327 to 0.647 and κG=0.552; 95% CI 0.430 to 0.675). The 95% CIs overlapped with moderate agreement in both. Intra-rater agreement exhibited overlapping 95% CIs for all 28 raters. κGwas either substantial or excellent (0.81–1) for 71.4% (20/28) of raters in both groups.ConclusionsDespite the minimal difference in overall EVT recommendations with either neuroimaging protocol one in five decisions changed with perfusion imaging. Regarding agreement we found that the use of automated CT perfusion images does not significantly impact the reliability of EVT decisions for patients with late-window LVO.