Serrallach, Bettina L.; Mujanović, A.; Ntoulias, Nikolaos; Manhart, Michael; Branca, Mattia; Brehm, Alex; Psychogios, Marios-Nikos; Kurmann, Christoph C.; Piechowiak, Eike I; Pilgram-Pastor, Sara; Meinel, Thomas; Seiffge, David; Mordasini, Pasquale; Gralla, Jan; Dobrocky, Tomas; Kaesmacher, Johannes (2024). Flat-panel Detector Perfusion Imaging and Conventional Multidetector Perfusion Imaging in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke : A Comparative Study. (In Press). Clinical neuroradiology Springer-Verlag 10.1007/s00062-024-01401-7
|
Text
s00062-024-01401-7.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY). Download (883kB) | Preview |
PURPOSE
Flat-panel detector computed tomography (FDCT) is increasingly used in (neuro)interventional angiography suites. This study aimed to compare FDCT perfusion (FDCTP) with conventional multidetector computed tomography perfusion (MDCTP) in patients with acute ischemic stroke.
METHODS
In this study, 19 patients with large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation who had undergone mechanical thrombectomy, baseline MDCTP and pre-interventional FDCTP were included. Hypoperfused tissue volumes were manually segmented on time to maximum (Tmax) and time to peak (TTP) maps based on the maximum visible extent. Absolute and relative thresholds were applied to the maximum visible extent on Tmax and relative cerebral blood flow (rCBF) maps to delineate penumbra volumes and volumes with a high likelihood of irreversible infarcted tissue ("core"). Standard comparative metrics were used to evaluate the performance of FDCTP.
RESULTS
Strong correlations and robust agreement were found between manually segmented volumes on MDCTP and FDCTP Tmax maps (r = 0.85, 95% CI 0.65-0.94, p < 0.001; ICC = 0.85, 95% CI 0.69-0.94) and TTP maps (r = 0.91, 95% CI 0.78-0.97, p < 0.001; ICC = 0.90, 95% CI 0.78-0.96); however, direct quantitative comparisons using thresholding showed lower correlations and weaker agreement (MDCTP versus FDCTP Tmax 6 s: r = 0.35, 95% CI -0.13-0.69, p = 0.15; ICC = 0.32, 95% CI 0.07-0.75). Normalization techniques improved results for Tmax maps (r = 0.78, 95% CI 0.50-0.91, p < 0.001; ICC = 0.77, 95% CI 0.55-0.91). Bland-Altman analyses indicated a slight systematic underestimation of FDCTP Tmax maximum visible extent volumes and slight overestimation of FDCTP TTP maximum visible extent volumes compared to MDCTP.
CONCLUSION
FDCTP and MDCTP provide qualitatively comparable volumetric results on Tmax and TTP maps; however, direct quantitative measurements of infarct core and hypoperfused tissue volumes showed lower correlations and agreement.
Actions (login required)
 |
Edit item |