Chalela Julio A, Kidwell Chelsea S, Nentwich Lauren M, Luby Marie, Butman John A, Demchuk Andrew M, Hill Michael D, Patronas Nicholas, Latour Lawrence, Warach Steven
Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
Lancet. 2007 Jan 27;369(9558):293-8. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60151-2.
Although the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the diagnosis of acute stroke is increasing, this method has not proved more effective than computed tomography (CT) in the emergency setting. We aimed to prospectively compare CT and MRI for emergency diagnosis of acute stroke.
We did a single-centre, prospective, blind comparison of non-contrast CT and MRI (with diffusion-weighted and susceptibility weighted images) in a consecutive series of patients referred for emergency assessment of suspected acute stroke. Scans were independently interpreted by four experts, who were unaware of clinical information, MRI-CT pairings, and follow-up imaging.
356 patients, 217 of whom had a final clinical diagnosis of acute stroke, were assessed. MRI detected acute stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic), acute ischaemic stroke, and chronic haemorrhage more frequently than did CT (p<0.0001, for all comparisons). MRI was similar to CT for the detection of acute intracranial haemorrhage. MRI detected acute ischaemic stroke in 164 of 356 patients (46%; 95% CI 41-51%), compared with CT in 35 of 356 patients (10%; 7-14%). In the subset of patients scanned within 3 h of symptom onset, MRI detected acute ischaemic stroke in 41 of 90 patients (46%; 35-56%); CT in 6 of 90 (7%; 3-14%). Relative to the final clinical diagnosis, MRI had a sensitivity of 83% (181 of 217; 78-88%) and CT of 26% (56 of 217; 20-32%) for the diagnosis of any acute stroke.
MRI is better than CT for detection of acute ischaemia, and can detect acute and chronic haemorrhage; therefore it should be the preferred test for accurate diagnosis of patients with suspected acute stroke. Because our patient sample encompassed the range of disease that is likely to be encountered in emergency cases of suspected stroke, our results are directly applicable to clinical practice.
尽管磁共振成像(MRI)在急性卒中诊断中的应用日益增多,但在急诊情况下,该方法并未被证明比计算机断层扫描(CT)更有效。我们旨在对CT和MRI用于急性卒中的急诊诊断进行前瞻性比较。
我们对一系列因疑似急性卒中而被转诊进行急诊评估的患者进行了单中心、前瞻性、非对比CT与MRI(包括弥散加权成像和磁敏感加权成像)的盲法比较。扫描结果由四位专家独立解读,他们对临床信息、MRI-CT配对以及后续成像情况均不知情。
共评估了356例患者,其中217例最终临床诊断为急性卒中。MRI检测到急性卒中(缺血性或出血性)、急性缺血性卒中和慢性出血的频率高于CT(所有比较的p<0.0001)。MRI在检测急性颅内出血方面与CT相似。MRI在356例患者中的164例(46%;95%CI 41 - 51%)检测到急性缺血性卒中,而CT在356例患者中的35例(10%;7 - 14%)检测到。在症状发作后3小时内进行扫描的患者亚组中,MRI在90例患者中的41例(46%;35 - 56%)检测到急性缺血性卒中;CT在90例中的6例(7%;3 - 14%)检测到。相对于最终临床诊断,MRI对任何急性卒中诊断的敏感性为83%(217例中的181例;78 - 88%),CT为26%(217例中的56例;20 - 32%)。
MRI在检测急性缺血方面优于CT,且能检测急性和慢性出血;因此,它应是疑似急性卒中患者准确诊断的首选检查。由于我们的患者样本涵盖了疑似卒中急诊病例中可能遇到的各种疾病范围,我们的结果可直接应用于临床实践。