Show simple item record

 
dc.contributorVall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus
dc.contributor.authorOspel, Johanna M.
dc.contributor.authorVolny, Ondrej
dc.contributor.authorQiu, Wu
dc.contributor.authorNajm, Mohamed
dc.contributor.authorHafeez, Moiz
dc.contributor.authorAbdalrahman, Sarah
dc.contributor.authorRubiera Del Fueyo, Marta A
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-02T13:09:45Z
dc.date.available2022-05-02T13:09:45Z
dc.date.issued2021-09
dc.identifier.citationOspel JM, Volny O, Qiu W, Najm M, Hafeez M, Abdalrahman S, et al. Impact of Multiphase Computed Tomography Angiography for Endovascular Treatment Decision-Making on Outcomes in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke. J Stroke. 2021 Sep 30;23(3):377–87.
dc.identifier.issn2287-6405
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11351/7451
dc.descriptionCerebrovascular circulation; Ischemia; Ischemic stroke
dc.description.abstractBackground and Purpose Various imaging paradigms are used for endovascular treatment (EVT) decision-making and outcome estimation in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We aim to compare how these imaging paradigms perform for EVT patient selection and outcome estimation. Methods Prospective multi-center cohort study of patients with AIS symptoms with multi-phase computed tomography angiography (mCTA) and computed tomography perfusion (CTP) baseline imaging. mCTA-based EVT-eligibility was defined as presence of large vessel occlusion (LVO) and moderate-to-good collaterals on mCTA. CTP-based eligibility was defined as presence of LVO, ischemic core (defined on relative cerebral blood flow, absolute cerebral blood flow, and cerebral blood volume maps) <70 mL, mismatch-ratio >1.8, absolute mismatch >15 mL. EVT-eligibility and adjusted rates of good outcome (modified Rankin Scale 0-2) based on these imaging paradigms were compared. Results Of 289/464 patients with LVO, 263 (91%) were EVT-eligible by mCTA-criteria versus 63 (22%), 19 (7%) and 103 (36%) by rCBF, aCBF, and CBV-CTP-criteria. CTP and mCTA-criteria were discordant in 40% to 53%. Estimated outcomes were best in patients who met both mCTA and CTP eligibility-criteria and were treated with EVT (62% to 87% good outcome). Patients eligible for EVT by mCTA-criteria and not by CTP-criteria receiving EVT achieved good outcome rates of 53% to 57%. Few patients met CTP-criteria and not mCTA-criteria for EVT. Conclusions Simpler imaging selection criteria that rely on little else than detection of the occluded blood vessel may be more sensitive and less specific, thus resulting in more patients being offered EVT and arguably benefiting from it.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherKorean Stroke Society
dc.relation.ispartofseriesJournal of stroke;23(3)
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
dc.sourceScientia
dc.subjectAngiografia - Tècniques digitals
dc.subjectIsquèmia cerebral - Imatgeria
dc.subject.meshComputed Tomography Angiography
dc.subject.meshBrain Ischemia
dc.subject.mesh/diagnostic imaging
dc.subject.meshEndovascular Procedures
dc.titleImpact of Multiphase Computed Tomography Angiography for Endovascular Treatment Decision-Making on Outcomes in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.identifier.doi10.5853/jos.2021.00619
dc.subject.decsangiografía por tomografía computarizada
dc.subject.decsisquemia cerebral
dc.subject.decs/diagnóstico por imagen
dc.subject.decsprocedimientos endovasculares
dc.relation.publishversionhttps://doi.org/10.5853/jos.2021.00619
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.audienceProfessionals
dc.contributor.organismesInstitut Català de la Salut
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Ospel JM] Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Basel, Basel, Switzerland. [Volny O] Czech National Centre for Evidence-Based Healthcare and Knowledge Translation (Cochrane Czech Republic, Czech EBHC: JBI Centre of Excellence, Masaryk University GRADE Centre), Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic. Department of Neurology, University Hospital Ostrava, Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic Department of Neurology, University Hospital Ostrava, Ostrava-Poruba, Czech Republic. [Qiu W, Najm M, Hafeez M, Abdalrahman S] Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. [Fainardi E] Servei de Neurologia, Vall d’Hebron Hospital Universitari, Barcelona, Spain
dc.identifier.pmid34649382
dc.identifier.wos000703882200007
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record