Comparison of automated infarct core volume measures between non-contrast computed tomography and perfusion imaging in acute stroke code patients evaluated for potential endovascular treatment

Funding Information: None. Publisher Copyright: © 2021 Copyright: Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved. Introduction: Patients with small core infarction and salvageable penumbra are likely to benefit from endovascular treatment (EVT). As computed tomography perfusion imaging (CTP) is not always available 24/7 for patient selection, many patients are transferred to stroke centers for CTP. We compared automatically measured infarct core volume (NCCTcore) from the non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) with ischemic core volume (CTPcore) from CTP and the outcome of EVT to clarify if NCCTcore measurement alone is sufficient to identify patients that benefit from transfer to stroke centers for EVT. Patients and methods: We included all consecutive stroke-code patients imaged with both NCCT and CTP at Helsinki University Hospital during 9/2016–01/2018. NCCTcore and CTPcore volumes were automatically calculated from the acute NCCT images. Follow-up infarct volume (FIV) was measured from 24 h follow-up NCCT to evaluate efficacy of EVT. To study whether NCCTcore could be used to identify patients eligible to EVT, we sub-grouped patients based on NCCTcore volumes (>50 mL and ≥ 70 mL). Results: Out of 1743 patients, baseline NCCTcore, CTPcore and follow-up NCCT was available for 288 patients. Median time from symptom onset to baseline imaging was 74 min (IQR 52–118), and time to follow-up imaging 24.15 h (22.25–26.33). Baseline NCCTcore was 20 mL (10–42), CTPcore 4 mL (0–16), and FIV 5 mL (1–49). Out of 288 patients, 23 had NCCTcore ≥ 70 mL and 26 had CTPcore ≥ 70 mL. NCCTcore and CTPcore performed similarly well in predicting large FIV (≥70 ml). Conclusion: NCCTcore is a promising tool to identify patients that are not eligible to EVT due to large ischemic cores at baseline imaging.