Published in

BMJ Publishing Group, Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery, 10(12), p. 1028-1032, 2020

DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-015827

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Comparing the outcomes of two independent computed tomography perfusion softwares and their impact on therapeutic decisions in acute ischemic stroke

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

BackgroundTo compare the computed tomography perfusion (CTP) outcomes derived from two commercial CTP processing software and evaluate their concordance in terms of eligibility for mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS), based on DEFUSE III criteria.MethodsA total of 118 patients (62 patients in the MT group and 56 patients in the non-MT (NMT) group) were included. Volumetric perfusion outputs were compared between Syngo.via (package A) and RAPID (package B). Influence on proceeding or not-proceeding with MT was based on DEFUSE III imaging eligibility criteria.ResultsMedian core infarct/hypoperfusion volumes were 12.3/126 mL in the MT group and 7.7/29.3 ml in the NMT group with package A and 10.5/138 mL and 1.9/24.5 mL with package B, respectively. In the MT group (n=62), concordant perfusion results in terms of patient triage were noted in all but two cases. Of these, one patient would not have qualified (low ASPECTS), while the other qualified based on package A results. For the NMT group (n=56), there was discordance in terms of MT eligibility in seven cases. However, none of these patients qualified for MT based on DEFUSE III criteria.ConclusionsBoth perfusion softwares showed high concordance in correctly triaging patients in the MT versus NMT groups (110/118, 93.2%), which further improved when all DEFUSE III imaging criteria were considered (117/118, 99.1%). The core/hypoperfusion volumes in the NMT group and core infarct volumes in the MT groups were comparable. The hypoperfusion volumes in the MT group varied slightly but did not affect triage between groups.