Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33580356›Full record

ArticleNeuroradiology2021

Automated estimation of ischemic core prior to thrombectomy: comparison of two current algorithms.

Lakshini Gunasekera, Leonid Churilov, Peter Mitchell, Andrew Bivard, Gagan Sharma, Mark W Parsons, Bernard Yan

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroradiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Lakshini GunasekeraMelbourne Brain Centre at Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Grattan St, Parkville, Victoria, 3050, Australia. lakshini_Slc@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2292-8155
Leonid ChurilovMelbourne Medical School, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Peter MitchellNeurointervention Service, Department of Radiology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Andrew BivardMelbourne Brain Centre at Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Grattan St, Parkville, Victoria, 3050, Australia.
Gagan SharmaMelbourne Brain Centre at Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Grattan St, Parkville, Victoria, 3050, Australia.
Mark W ParsonsMelbourne Brain Centre at Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Grattan St, Parkville, Victoria, 3050, Australia.
Bernard YanMelbourne Brain Centre at Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Grattan St, Parkville, Victoria, 3050, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEndovascular thrombectomy (EVT) improves clinical outcomes in ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion. Clinical benefits are inversely proportional to size of the pre-treatment ischemic core. This study compared estimated ischemic core volumes by two different CT perfusion (CTP) automated algorithms to the gold standard follow-up infarct volume using diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) to assess for congruence, and thus eligibility for EVT.

methodsRetrospective, single-center cohort study of 102 patients presenting to a comprehensive stroke center between 2012 and 2018. Inclusion criteria were CT perfusion prior to EVT, successful EVT with mTIBI 2b-3 reperfusion, and DWI post-EVT. CTP data were retrospectively processed by two algorithms: "delay and dispersion insensitive deconvolution" (DISD, RAPID software) versus "delay and dispersion corrected single value decomposition" (ddSVD, Mistar software), using commercially available software. Core volumes were compared to follow up DWI using independent software (MRIcron). Agreement between each algorithm and DWI was estimated using Lin's concordance coefficient and analyzed using reduced major axis regression.

resultsWe included 102 patients. Both algorithms had excellent agreement with DWI (Lin's concordance coefficients: DISD 0.8 (95% CI: 0.73; 0.87), ddSVD 0.92 (95% CI: 0.89; 0.95). Compared to ddSVD (reduced major axis slope = 0.95), DISD exhibited a larger extent of proportional bias (slope = 1.12).

conclusionThe ddSVD algorithm better correlates with DWI follow-up infarct volume than DISD processing. The DISD algorithm overestimated larger ischemic cores which may lead to patient exclusion from thrombectomy based on selection by core volume.

Indexed as

Brain IschemiaStrokeAlgorithmsCohort StudiesHumansRetrospective StudiesThrombectomyAutomated post processing softwareCT perfusionReperfusionStrokeThrombectomy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.