From the Institute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Scotland, UK.
Stroke. 2019 Feb;50(2):344-348. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.118.022606.
Background and Purpose- Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) has a poorer prognosis than acute ischemic stroke (AIS). However, clinician perception of prognosis may influence treatment decisions and adversely affect outcome. On acute CT, the conspicuity of ICH compared with AIS may lead clinicians to overestimate severity and influence prognostic evaluation. We investigated whether clinicians' estimates of volume, severity, and prognosis from acute imaging differed between ICH and AIS. Methods- CT scans from participants with acute ICH or ischemic stroke were reviewed. Volume was calculated using the ABC/2 method and automated volumetric analysis via specialized imaging software. ICH cases were matched with AIS cases for lesion volume, based on acute (<6 hours) CT for ICH, and 24-hour CT for AIS. Blind to clinical information, clinicians estimated lesion volume to the nearest 5 mL, graded lesion severity from 1 (mild) to 5 (very severe), and estimated 30-day prognosis using the modified Rankin Scale. Results- We compared 33 ICH cases with 33 volume-matched AIS cases. Clinicians overestimated ICH volume and underestimated AIS volumes: mean differences (estimated-actual volume) were +8 mL (±30) for ICH and -8 mL (±27) for AIS ( P<0.001). Observers rated ICH to be of greater severity and poorer prognosis compared with AIS cases: 109 of 265 (41%) ICH cases rated severity categories 4 or 5 compared with 36 of 257 (14%) AIS, P<0.001; estimated modified Rankin Scale of 0 to 2 in 125 of 265 (47%) ICH compared with 190 of 257 (74%) AIS, P<0.001. Results were unaffected by presence of intraventricular blood. Estimated severity and prognosis for ICH remained significantly worse compared with AIS after adjustment for estimated volumes. Conclusions- Clinicians overestimated ICH volume and severity compared with AIS of equivalent volume and also assigned significantly worse prognosis independent of volume estimates.
背景与目的-脑出血(ICH)的预后比急性缺血性脑卒中(AIS)差。然而,临床医生对预后的看法可能会影响治疗决策,并对结果产生不利影响。在急性 CT 上,ICH 与 AIS 相比,其可见性可能导致临床医生高估严重程度并影响预后评估。我们研究了急性影像学表现的 ICH 和 AIS 之间,临床医生对体积、严重程度和预后的评估是否存在差异。方法-对患有急性 ICH 或缺血性脑卒中的患者的 CT 扫描进行了回顾性分析。使用 ABC/2 法和专门的成像软件进行自动容积分析来计算体积。ICH 病例根据急性(<6 小时)ICH 的 CT 和 AIS 的 24 小时 CT,与体积匹配的 AIS 病例相匹配。在不了解临床信息的情况下,临床医生将病变体积估计到最接近的 5 mL,根据病变严重程度从 1(轻度)到 5(非常严重)进行分级,并使用改良 Rankin 量表估计 30 天预后。结果-我们比较了 33 例 ICH 病例和 33 例体积匹配的 AIS 病例。临床医生高估了 ICH 体积,低估了 AIS 体积:ICH 的平均差异(估计-实际体积)为+8 mL(±30),而 AIS 为-8 mL(±27)(P<0.001)。观察者认为 ICH 比 AIS 病例的严重程度和预后更差:265 例 ICH 病例中有 109 例(41%)评定为 4 或 5 级,而 257 例 AIS 病例中只有 36 例(14%),P<0.001;265 例 ICH 病例中有 125 例(47%)估计改良 Rankin 量表为 0-2,而 257 例 AIS 病例中有 190 例(74%),P<0.001。即使存在脑室内出血,结果也没有受到影响。在调整估计体积后,ICH 严重程度和预后的估计仍明显差于 AIS。结论-与体积相等的 AIS 相比,临床医生高估了 ICH 体积和严重程度,并且独立于体积估计值,还分配了明显更差的预后。