Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background and purpose
The modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarct (mTICI) score is used to grade angiographic outcome after endovascular thrombectomy. We sought to identify factors that decrease the accuracy of intraprocedural mTICI.Methods
We performed a 2-center retrospective cohort study comparing operator (n=6) mTICI scores to consensus scores from blinded adjudicators. Groups were also assessed by dichotomizing mTICI scores to 0–2a versus 2b–3.Results
One hundred thirty endovascular thrombectomy procedures were included. Operators and adjudicators had a pairwise agreement in 96 cases (73.8%). Krippendorff α was 0.712. Multivariate analysis showed endovascular thrombectomy overnight (odds ratio [OR]=3.84 [95% CI, 1.22–12.1]), lacking frontal (OR, 5.66 [95 CI, 1.36–23.6]), or occipital (OR, 7.18 [95 CI, 2.12–24.3]) region reperfusion, and higher operator mTICI scores (OR, 2.16 [95 CI, 1.16–4.01]) were predictive of incorrectly scoring mTICI intraprocedurally. With dichotomized mTICI scores, increasing number of passes was associated with increased risk of operator error (OR, 1.93 [95 CI, 1.22–3.05]).Conclusions
In our study, mTICI disagreement between operator and adjudicators was observed in 26.2% of cases. Interventions that took place between 22:30 and 4:00, featured frontal or occipital region nonperfusion, higher operator mTICI scores, and increased number of passes had higher odds of intraprocedural mTICI inaccuracy.
SUBMITTER: Pressman E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8650713 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Pressman Elliot E Waqas Muhammad M Sands Victoria V Siddiqui Adnan A Snyder Kenneth K Davies Jason J Levy Elad E Ionita Ciprian C Guerrero Waldo W Ren Zeguang Z Mokin Maxim M
Stroke 20210909 11
<h4>Background and purpose</h4>The modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarct (mTICI) score is used to grade angiographic outcome after endovascular thrombectomy. We sought to identify factors that decrease the accuracy of intraprocedural mTICI.<h4>Methods</h4>We performed a 2-center retrospective cohort study comparing operator (n=6) mTICI scores to consensus scores from blinded adjudicators. Groups were also assessed by dichotomizing mTICI scores to 0–2a versus 2b–3.<h4>Results</h4>One hundred ...[more]