scholarly journals Computed Tomography Perfusion Data for Acute Ischemic Stroke Evaluation Using Rapid Software

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frans Kauw ◽  
Jeremy J. Heit ◽  
Blake W. Martin ◽  
Fasco van Ommen ◽  
L. Jaap Kappelle ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
pp. 028418512110358
Author(s):  
Anubhav Katyal ◽  
Sonu Menachem Maimonides Bhaskar

Background Computed tomography perfusion (CTP) imaging has emerged as an important adjunct to the current armamentarium of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) workflow. However, its adoption in routine clinical practice is far from optimal. Purpose To investigate the putative association of CTP imaging biomarkers in the assessment of prognosis in acute ischemic stroke. Material and Methods We performed a systematic review of the literature using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials focusing on CTP biomarkers, tissue-based and clinical-based patient outcomes. We included randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and case-controlled studies published from January 2005 to 28 August 2020. Two independent reviewers conducted the study appraisal, data extraction, and quality assessment of the studies. Results A total of 60 full-text studies were included in the final systematic review analysis. Increasing infarct core volume is associated with reduced odds of achieving functional independence (modified Rankin score 0–2) at 90 days and is correlated with the final infarct volume when reperfusion is achieved. Conclusion CTP has value in assessing tissue perfusion status in the hyperacute stroke setting and the long-term clinical prognosis of patients with AIS receiving reperfusion therapy. However, the prognostic use of CTP requires optimization and further validation.


Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 223-231
Author(s):  
Hulin Kuang ◽  
Wu Qiu ◽  
Anna M. Boers ◽  
Scott Brown ◽  
Keith Muir ◽  
...  

Background and Purpose: Prediction of infarct extent among patients with acute ischemic stroke using computed tomography perfusion is defined by predefined discrete computed tomography perfusion thresholds. Our objective is to develop a threshold-free computed tomography perfusion–based machine learning (ML) model to predict follow-up infarct in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Methods: Sixty-eight patients from the PRoveIT study (Measuring Collaterals With Multi-Phase CT Angiography in Patients With Ischemic Stroke) were used to derive a ML model using random forest to predict follow-up infarction voxel by voxel, and 137 patients from the HERMES study (Highly Effective Reperfusion Evaluated in Multiple Endovascular Stroke Trials) were used to test the derived ML model. Average map, T max , cerebral blood flow, cerebral blood volume, and time variables including stroke onset-to-imaging and imaging-to-reperfusion time, were used as features to train the ML model. Spatial and volumetric agreement between the ML model predicted follow-up infarct and actual follow-up infarct were assessed. Relative cerebral blood flow <0.3 threshold using RAPID software and time-dependent T max thresholds were compared with the ML model. Results: In the test cohort (137 patients), median follow-up infarct volume predicted by the ML model was 30.9 mL (interquartile range, 16.4–54.3 mL), compared with a median 29.6 mL (interquartile range, 11.1–70.9 mL) of actual follow-up infarct volume. The Pearson correlation coefficient between 2 measurements was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.74–0.86, P <0.001) while the volumetric difference was −3.2 mL (interquartile range, −16.7 to 6.1 mL). Volumetric difference with the ML model was smaller versus the relative cerebral blood flow <0.3 threshold and the time-dependent T max threshold ( P <0.001). Conclusions: A ML using computed tomography perfusion data and time estimates follow-up infarction in patients with acute ischemic stroke better than current methods.


2021 ◽  
pp. 197140092098866
Author(s):  
Ryan A Rava ◽  
Kenneth V Snyder ◽  
Maxim Mokin ◽  
Muhammad Waqas ◽  
Alexander R Podgorsak ◽  
...  

Computed tomography perfusion (CTP) is crucial for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patient diagnosis. To improve infarct prediction, enhanced image processing and automated parameter selection have been implemented in Vital Images’ new CTP+ software. We compared CTP+ with its previous version, commercially available software (RAPID and Sphere), and follow-up diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). Data from 191 AIS patients between March 2019 and January 2020 was retrospectively collected and allocated into endovascular intervention ( n = 81) and conservative treatment ( n = 110) cohorts. Intervention patients were treated for large vessel occlusion, underwent mechanical thrombectomy, and achieved successful reperfusion of thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 2b/2c/3. Conservative treatment patients suffered large or small vessel occlusion and did not receive intravenous thrombolysis or mechanical thrombectomy. Infarct and penumbra were assessed using intervention and conservative treatment patients, respectively. Infarct and penumbra volumes were segmented from CTP+ and compared with 24-h DWI along with RAPID, Sphere, and Vitrea. Mean infarct differences (95% confidence intervals) and Spearman correlation coefficients (SCCs) between DWI and each CTP software product for intervention patients are: CTP+  = (5.8 ± 5.9 ml, 0.62), RAPID = (10.0  ± 5.2 ml, 0.73), Sphere = (3.0 ± 6.0 ml, 0.56), Vitrea = (7.2 ± 4.9 ml, 0.66). For conservative treatment patients, mean infarct differences and SCCs are: CTP+ = (–8.0 ± 5.4 ml, 0.64), RAPID = (–25.6 ± 11.5 ml, 0.60), Sphere = (–25.6 ± 8.0 ml, 0.66), Vitrea = (1.3 ± 4.0 ml, 0.72). CTP+ performed similarly to RAPID and Sphere in addition to its semi-automated predecessor, Vitrea, when assessing intervention patient infarct volumes. For conservative treatment patients, CTP+ outperformed RAPID and Sphere in assessing penumbra. Semi-automated Vitrea remains the most accurate in assessing penumbra, but CTP+ provides an improved workflow from its predecessor.


2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 308-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina T. Gentile ◽  
John Cernetich ◽  
Uday S. Kanamalla ◽  
Jeffrey P. Kochan ◽  
Hannah Reimer ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document