Dataset Information

Baseline Cerebral Ischemic Core Quantified by Different Automatic Software and Its Predictive Value for Clinical Outcome.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

This study aims to investigate the agreement of three software packages in measuring baseline ischemic core volume (ICV) and penumbra volume (PV), and determine their predictive values for unfavorable clinical outcome in patients with endovascular thrombectomy (EVT).

Methods

Patients with acute ischemic stroke who underwent computed tomographic perfusion (CTP) were recruited. Baseline CTP measurements including ICV and PV were calculated by three software packages of IntelliSpace Portal (ISP), Rapid Processing of Perfusion and Diffusion (RAPID), and fast-processing of ischemic stroke (F-STROKE). All patients received EVT, and the modified Rankin scale (mRS) at 90 days after EVT was assessed to determine the clinical outcomes (favorable: mRS = 0-2; unfavorable: mRS = 3-6). The agreement of CTP measurements among three software packages was determined using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The associations between CTP measurements and unfavorable clinical outcome were analyzed using logistic regression. Receiver operating characteristic curves were conducted to calculate the area under the curve (AUC) of CTP measurements in predicting unfavorable clinical outcome.

Results

Of 223 recruited patients (68.2 ± 11.3 years old; 145 males), 17.0% had unfavorable clinical outcome after EVT. Excellent agreement between F-STROKE and RAPID was found in measuring ICV (ICC 0.965; 95% CI 0.956-0.973) and PV (ICC 0.966; 95% CI 0.956-0.973). ICVs measured by three software packages were significantly associated with unfavorable clinical outcome before (odds ratios 1.012-1.018, all P < 0.01) and after (odds ratios 1.003-1.014, all P < 0.05) adjusted for confounding factors (age, gender, TOAST classification, and NIHSS on admission). In predicting unfavorable clinical outcome, ICV measured by F-STROKE showed similar performance to that measured by RAPID (AUC 0.701 vs. 0.717) but higher performance than that measured by ISP (AUC 0.629).

Conclusions

The software of F-STROKE has excellent agreement with the widely used analysis tool of RAPID in measuring ICV and PV. The ischemic core volume measured by both F-STROKE and RAPID is a stronger predictor for unfavorable clinical outcome after EVT compared to ISP.

SUBMITTER: Shi Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8072147 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn adults, a single pre-treatment four-dimensional CT (4D-CT) acquisition is often used to account for respiratory-induced target motion during radiotherapy. However, studies have indicated that a 4D-CT is not always representative for respiratory motion. Our aim was to investigate whether respiratory-induced diaphragm motion in children on a single pre-treatment 4DCT can accurately predict respiratory-induced diaphragm motion as observed on cone beam CTs (CBCTs).MethodsTwelve patients (mean age 14.5 yrs.; range 8.6-17.9 yrs) were retrospectively included based on visibility of the diaphragm on abdominal or thoracic imaging data acquired during free breathing. A 4DCT for planning purposes and daily/weekly CBCTs (total 125; range 4-29 per patient) acquired prior to dose delivery were available. The amplitude, corresponding to the difference in position of the diaphragm in cranial-caudal direction in end-inspiration and end-expiration phases, was extracted from the 4DCT (A4DCT). The amplitude in CBCTs (ACBCT) was defined as displacement between averaged in- and expiration diaphragm positions on corresponding projection images, and the distribution of ACBCT was compared to A4DCT (one-sample t-test, significance level p?< 0.05).ResultsOver all patients, the mean A4DCT was 10.4 mm and the mean ACBCT 11.6 mm. For 9/12 patients, A4DCT differed significantly (p <?0.05) from ACBCT. Differences >?3 mm were found in 69/125 CBCTs (55%), with A4DCT mostly underestimating ACBCT. For 7/12 patients, diaphragm positions differed significantly from the baseline position.ConclusionRespiratory-induced diaphragm motion determined on 4DCT does not accurately predict the daily respiratory-induced diaphragm motion observed on CBCTs, as the amplitude and baseline position differed statistically significantly in the majority of patients. Regular monitoring of respiratory motion during the treatment course using CBCTs could yield a higher accuracy when a daily adaptation to the actual breathing amplitude takes place.

Project description:Purpose: Automated postprocessing packages have been developed for managing acute ischemic stroke (AIS). These packages identify ischemic core and penumbra using either computed tomographic perfusion imaging (CTP) data or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. Measurements of abnormal tissues and treatment decisions derived from different vendors can vary. The purpose of this study is to investigate the agreement of volumetric and decision-making outcomes derived from two software packages. Methods: A total of 594 AIS patients (174 underwent CTP and 420 underwent MRI) were included. Imaging data were accordingly postprocessed by two software packages: RAPID and RealNow. Volumetric outputs were compared between packages by performing intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Wilcoxon paired test and Bland–Altman analysis. Concordance of selecting patients eligible for mechanical thrombectomy (MT) was assessed based on neuroimaging criteria proposed in DEFUSE3. Results: In the group with CTP data, mean ischemic core volume (ICV)/penumbral volume (PV) was 14.9/81.1 mL via RAPID and 12.6/83.2 mL via RealNow. Meanwhile, in the MRI group, mean ICV/PV were 52.4/68.4 mL and 48.9/61.6 mL via RAPID and RealNow, respectively. Reliability, which was measured by ICC of ICV and PV in CTP and MRI groups, ranged from 0.87 to 0.99. The bias remained small between measurements (CTP ICV: 0.89 mL, CTP PV: −2 mL, MRI ICV: 3.5 mL and MRI PV: 6.8 mL). In comparison with CTP ICV with follow-up DWI, the ICC was 0.92 and 0.94 for RAPID and Realnow, respectively. The bias remained small between CTP ICV and follow-up DWI measurements (Rapid: −4.65 mL, RealNow: −3.65 mL). Wilcoxon paired test showed no significant difference between measurements. The results of patient triage were concordant in 159/174 cases (91%, ICC: 0.90) for CTP and 400/420 cases (95%, ICC: 0.93) for MRI. Conclusion: The CTP ICV derived from RealNow was more accurate than RAPID. The similarity in volumetric measurement between packages did not necessarily relate to equivalent patient triage. In this study, RealNow showed excellent agreement with RAPID in measuring ICV and PV as well as patient triage.