Phan Thanh G, Donnan Geoffrey A, Koga Masatoshi, Mitchell L Anne, Molan Maurice, Fitt Gregory, Chong Winston, Holt Michael, Reutens David C
National Stroke Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2007;24(4):321-7. doi: 10.1159/000106977. Epub 2007 Aug 9.
The extent of cerebral ischemia, assessed by the Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) method and unaided visual determination of the CT Summit Criterion, correlates with increased risk of intracerebral hemorrhage following rt-PA administration. Concerns about the accuracy of the unaided visual assessment in the estimation of infarct size and the conservative nature of the ASPECTS method led us to develop a new method (MCAGrid) based on stereological grid counting and a digital atlas of the middle cerebral artery (MCA) infarct territory.
We tested the hypotheses that the stereological method increases the accuracy of infarct estimation and that the number of patients deemed eligible for thrombolysis is greater with this method than with existing methods. Four experienced radiologists with extensive neuroradiological experience examined the CT images of 19 patients with MCA territory stroke and determined patient eligibility for thrombolysis by: unaided visual determination of the CT Summit Criterion, MCAGrid, and the ASPECTS score. The chi(2) test was used to compare the differences in the number of patients deemed 'eligible' for thrombolysis by the 3 imaging methods. Further, the unaided visual assessment and MCAGrid were compared with volumes calculated following manual segmentation of infarct, and the sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative likelihood ratios for these techniques were calculated.
In general, MCAGrid was better than unaided visual assessment in the prediction of >1/3 involvement of the MCA territory by infarct. The number of patients considered as 'eligible' for thrombolysis based on imaging criteria was significantly lower when ASPECTS criteria (15/76) were used than when unaided visual determination of the CT Summit Criterion (32/76; p < 0.01) or MCAGrid (59/76; p < 0.001) criteria were used.
The choice of methods for rating infarct extent affects the number of patients 'eligible' for thrombolysis significantly. Furthermore, MCAGrid increased the accuracy with which infarct extent was estimated. These results provide justification for a prospective study of this technique in the setting of acute stroke.
通过阿尔伯塔卒中项目早期CT评分(ASPECTS)方法以及依据CT峰标准进行的肉眼判断来评估的脑缺血程度,与rt-PA给药后脑出血风险增加相关。由于担心肉眼评估在梗死面积估计中的准确性以及ASPECTS方法的保守性,我们基于体视学网格计数和大脑中动脉(MCA)梗死区域数字图谱开发了一种新方法(MCAGrid)。
我们检验了以下假设:体视学方法提高了梗死估计的准确性,并且使用该方法判定适合溶栓治疗的患者数量比现有方法更多。四位具有丰富神经放射学经验的资深放射科医生检查了19例MCA区域卒中患者的CT图像,并通过以下方式确定患者是否适合溶栓治疗:依据CT峰标准进行肉眼判断、使用MCAGrid以及ASPECTS评分。采用卡方检验比较三种成像方法判定为“适合”溶栓治疗的患者数量差异。此外,将肉眼评估和MCAGrid与梗死手动分割后计算的体积进行比较,并计算这些技术的敏感性、特异性以及阳性和阴性似然比。
总体而言,在预测梗死累及MCA区域超过1/3方面,MCAGrid比肉眼评估更好。基于成像标准被认为“适合”溶栓治疗的患者数量,使用ASPECTS标准时(15/76)显著低于使用CT峰标准的肉眼判断(32/76;p<0.01)或MCAGrid(59/76;p<0.001)标准时。
评定梗死范围的方法选择显著影响“适合”溶栓治疗的患者数量。此外,MCAGrid提高了梗死范围估计的准确性。这些结果为在急性卒中背景下对该技术进行前瞻性研究提供了依据。