Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34331546›Full record

Trial reportNeuroradiology2022

Two-way comparison of brain perfusion image processing software for patients with acute ischemic strokes in real-world.

Heng Cai, Shengyu Fan, Yueyan Bian, Qi Yang, Zhenhai Long, Liangyu Chen, Wei Tang, Nan Zhang, Yongyu Zhen, Zhiqing Li

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Neuroradiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Heng CaiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, 110004, People's Republic of China.
Shengyu FanNanjing Yuexi Medical Technology Co., Ltd., Nanjing, 210000, People's Republic of China.
Yueyan BianNanjing Yuexi Medical Technology Co., Ltd., Nanjing, 210000, People's Republic of China.
Qi YangDepartment of Radiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100020, People's Republic of China.
Zhenhai LongDepartment of Neurosurgery, Central Hospital of Fuxin, Fuxin, Liaoning, 123001, People's Republic of China.
Liangyu ChenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, 110004, People's Republic of China.
Wei TangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, 110004, People's Republic of China.
Nan ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, 110004, People's Republic of China.
Yongyu ZhenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Central Hospital of Fuxin, Fuxin, Liaoning, 123001, People's Republic of China.
Zhiqing LiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, 110004, People's Republic of China. Lizq@sj-hospital.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7309-0356
China Medical University · CNCapital Medical University · CNLiaoning Provincial People's Hospital · CN

Funding

345 Talent Project fund of Shengjing hospital M0270Doctoral Start-up Foundation of Liaoning Province 20170520020Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province 2019-ZD-0757Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province 2020-KF-12-06Postdoctoral Research Foundation of China 2018M641745Shenyang Science and Technology Bureau No. 19-112-4-044Young Scientists Fund 81702488
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePerfusion imaging generates multimaps of ischemic tissues and is a proven decision-making tool in patients with acute ischemic stroke. However, the reliability of perfusion post-processing outcomes has been debated, given disparate results of various software applications, especially for patients with small ischemic core volume. This study was undertaken to compare ischemic volume estimates determined by imSTROKE (a software with new imaging protocol) and RAPID computer applications, respectively.

methodsA total of 611 patients qualified for study, each having met inclusion and exclusion criteria of the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN trial). Subjects were examined by computed tomography perfusion (CTP) imaging (n = 349) or perfusion-weighted (PWI) and diffusion-weighted (DWI) imaging (n = 262). Ischemic volumes estimated by imSTROKE and RAPID applications were then compared. We used Bland-Altman analysis and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) to ascertain agreement between applications. Accuracies of estimated core infarct and penumbra volumes were tested at specific thresholds (core: 25 mL, 50 mL, and 70 mL; penumbra: 45 mL, 90 mL, and 125 mL).

resultsMedian core infarct volumes by imSTROKE and RAPID were 29.18 mL and 29.53 mL, respectively (ICC = 0.9880, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.9860-0.9898). Median penumbra volumes by imSTROKE and RAPID were 68.20 mL and 68.55 mL, respectively (ICC = 0.9885, 95% CI: 0.9865-0.9902).

conclusionIn estimating core infarct and penumbra volumes, imSTROKE and RAPID applications showed high-level agreement. For patients with small ischemic core volume, compared with RAPID, imSTROKE may have better sensitivity.

Indexed as

Brain IschemiaIschemic StrokeStrokeBrainHumansPerfusionPerfusion ImagingReproducibility of ResultsSoftwareAcute ischemic strokeBrain processing softwareIschemic volumesPerfusion imaging

Identifiers

PMID34331546
OpenAlexW3184431040

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.