Kelley Roger E, Buchhanolla Prabandh, Pandey Amrita, Thapa Monika, Hossain Md Ismail, Bhuiyan Mohammad Alfrad Nobel
Department of Neurology, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center-Shreveport, 1501 Kings Highway, Shreveport, LA 71103, United States.
Biostatistics and Computational Biology Lab, Department of Medicine, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center-Shreveport, 1501 Kings Highway, Shreveport, LA 71103, United States.
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2025 Feb;34(2):108182. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2024.108182. Epub 2024 Dec 6.
To evaluate patients acute cerebral ischemia in order to assess for factors which may help to differentiate patients with small vessel involvement from those with large vessel involvement in an effort to determine diagnostic yield of vascular imaging.
We prospectively and consecutively evaluated all acute ischemic stroke patients at our medical center from May 16, 2021 to December 10, 2021. Distinction between small vessel and large vessel involvement was based upon clinical presentation, the results of brain imaging and either computed tomographic angiography, in the vast majority, or magnetic resonance angiography. Patient demographics and risk factors for stroke as well as therapeutic intervention was assessed.
Of the 90 patients studied, 59 had large vessel ischemia (66%) with 26 (44%) having large vessel occlusion and one had symptomatic high-grade middle cerebral artery stenosis. Conversely, none of the 31 patients with small vessel presentation (34%) had large vessel occlusion or high-grade stenosis. In addition, 19 out of 59 (32%) large vessel patients compared to 2 of 31 (6%) of the small vessel patients had atrial fibrillation identified as a potential mechanism with a p-value of 0.01 by univariate analysis and 0.17 by multivariate analysis. The routine use of vascular imaging in acute ischemic stroke is of very low yield in small vessel presentation with the presence of potential cardiogenic emboli is also relatively low. Efforts at accelerated identification of a small vessel mechanism, to avoid unnecessary testing, should provide significant value from both a patient management and cost standpoint.
评估急性脑缺血患者,以确定有助于区分小血管受累患者与大血管受累患者的因素,从而确定血管成像的诊断价值。
我们对2021年5月16日至2021年12月10日在我院医疗中心的所有急性缺血性卒中患者进行了前瞻性连续评估。小血管和大血管受累的区分基于临床表现、脑成像结果以及绝大多数情况下的计算机断层血管造影或磁共振血管造影。评估了患者的人口统计学特征、卒中危险因素以及治疗干预情况。
在研究的90例患者中,59例有大血管缺血(66%),其中26例(44%)有大血管闭塞,1例有症状性大脑中动脉重度狭窄。相反,31例小血管病变患者(34%)均无大血管闭塞或重度狭窄。此外,59例大血管病变患者中有19例(32%),而小血管病变患者中有2例(6%)被确定心房颤动为潜在机制,单因素分析p值为0.01,多因素分析p值为0.17。在小血管病变的急性缺血性卒中患者中,常规使用血管成像的诊断价值很低,存在潜在心源性栓塞的情况也相对较少。从患者管理和成本角度来看,加快确定小血管机制以避免不必要检查的努力应具有重要价值。