4.4 Article

Relationship between thrombus attenuation and different stroke subtypes

Journal

NEURORADIOLOGY
Volume 55, Issue 9, Pages 1071-1079

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00234-013-1217-y

Keywords

Stroke; Computed tomography; Etiopathogenesis; Diagnostic techniques

Ask authors/readers for more resources

More insights in the etiopathogenesis of thrombi could be helpful in the treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke. The aim of our study was to determine the relationship between presence of a hyperdense vessel sign and thrombus density with different stroke subtypes. We included 123 patients with acute ischemic anterior circulation stroke and a visible occlusion on CT-angiography caused by cardioembolism (n = 53), large artery atherosclerosis (n = 55), or dissection (n = 15). Presence or absence of a hyperdense vessel sign was assessed and thrombus density was measured in Hounsfield Units (HU) on non-contrast 1 mm thin slices CT. Subsequently, occurrence of hyperdense vessel sign and thrombus density (absolute HU and rHU (=HU thrombus/HU contralateral)) were related with stroke subtypes. The presence of hyperdense vessel signs differed significantly among subtypes and was found in 45, 64 and 93 % of patients with cardioembolism, large artery atherosclerosis and dissection, respectively (p = 0.003). The mean HU and rHU (+95 % CI) of the thrombi in all vessels were respectively 56.1 (53.2-59.0) and 1.39 (1.33-1.45) in cardioembolism, 64.6 (62.2-66.9) and 1.59 (1.54-1.64) in large artery atherosclerosis and 76.4 (73.0-79.8) and 1.88 (1.79-1.97) in dissection (p < 0.0001). We found the same significant ranking order in the density of thrombi with hyperdense vessel signs (mean HU and rHU (+95 % CI), respectively): cardioembolism 61.3 (57.4-65.3) and 1.49 (57.4-65.3); large artery atherosclerosis 67.3 (64.9-69.7) and 1.65 (1.58-1.71); dissection 76.4 (72.6-80.1) and 1.89 (1.79-1.99, p < 0.0001). Presence of a hyperdense vessel sign and thrombus density are related to stroke subtype.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available