Department of Biomedical Engineering, University at Buffalo, USA.
Canon Stroke and Vascular Research Center, Buffalo, USA.
Neuroradiol J. 2021 Jun;34(3):222-237. doi: 10.1177/1971400920988668. Epub 2021 Jan 21.
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 ( = 81) and conservative treatment ( = 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.
计算机断层灌注(CTP)对急性缺血性脑卒中(AIS)患者的诊断至关重要。为了提高对梗死的预测, Vital Images 的新型 CTP+软件中实现了增强的图像处理和自动化参数选择。我们将 CTP+与之前的版本、商业上可用的软件(RAPID 和 Sphere)以及后续的弥散加权成像(DWI)进行了比较。我们回顾性地收集了 2019 年 3 月至 2020 年 1 月期间 191 名 AIS 患者的数据,并将其分为血管内介入( = 81)和保守治疗( = 110)两组。介入组患者接受了大血管闭塞的治疗,进行了机械血栓切除术,并实现了脑梗死溶栓 2b/2c/3 的再通。保守治疗组患者患有大或小血管闭塞,未接受静脉溶栓或机械血栓切除术。我们分别用介入治疗和保守治疗的患者评估了梗死和半暗带。我们从 CTP+和 24 小时 DWI 以及 RAPID、Sphere 和 Vitrea 中分割了梗死和半暗带的体积。介入患者的 DWI 与每个 CTP 软件产品之间的平均梗死差异(95%置信区间)和 Spearman 相关系数(SCC)分别为: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)。对于保守治疗的患者,平均梗死差异和 SCC 分别为: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)。与之前的半自动化软件 Vitrea 相比,CTP+在评估介入患者的梗死体积时与 RAPID 和 Sphere 表现相似。对于保守治疗的患者,CTP+在评估半暗带方面优于 RAPID 和 Sphere。半自动化的 Vitrea 仍然是评估半暗带最准确的,但 CTP+ 提供了比其前身更好的工作流程。