Rapid Assessment of Perfusion–Diffusion Mismatch

Author:

Butcher Ken1,Parsons Mark1,Allport Louise1,Lee Sang Bong1,Barber P. Alan1,Tress Brian1,Donnan Geoffrey A.1,Davis Stephen M.1

Affiliation:

1. From the Department of Neurology (K.B., L.A., S.D.) and Radiology (B.T.), Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne Australia; the Department of Neurology (K.B.), University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; the Department of Neurology (S.B.L.), Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea; the Department of Neurology (P.A.B.), Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand; the Department of Neurology (M.P.), John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, Australia; and the Department...

Abstract

Background and Purpose— For MR perfusion–diffusion (PWI-DWI) mismatch to become routine in thrombolysis patient selection, rapid and reliable assessment tools are required. We examined interrater variability in PWI/DWI volume measurements and developed a rapid assessment tool based on the Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Scores (ASPECTS) system. Methods— DWI and PWI were performed in 35 patients with stroke <6 hours after symptom onset. DWI lesion and PWI (time to peak) volumes were measured with planimetric techniques by 4 raters and the 95% limits of agreement calculated. ASPECT scores were assessed separately by 4 investigators (2 experienced and 2 inexperienced) for DWI (MR DWI scores) and PWI (MR time to peak scores). MR mismatch scores were calculated as MR DWI-MR time to peak scores. Results— Interobserver variability was much greater for PWI (95% limit of agreement=±72.3 mL) than for DWI (95% limit of agreement=±12.6 mL). A semiautomated PWI volume (time to peak+2 s) was therefore used to calculate mismatch volume. MR mismatch scores ≥2 predicted 20% PWI-DWI mismatch by volume with mean 78% sensitivity (range, 72% to 84%) and 88% specificity (range, 83% to 90%). There was excellent agreement on mismatch classification using MR mismatch scores between experienced raters (weighted kappa scores of 0.94) with agreement in 34 of 35 cases. Agreement was less consistent between inexperienced raters (weighted kappa=0.49, 28 of 35 cases). Conclusions— Variability in planimetric mismatch measurements arises primarily from differences in PWI volume assessment. High specificity and interrater reliability may make MR mismatch scores an ideal rapid screening tool for potential thrombolysis patients.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Advanced and Specialized Nursing,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Neurology (clinical)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3