4.6 Article

Identification of Hemodynamic compromise by cerebrovascular reserve and oxygen extraction fraction in occlusive vascular disease

Journal

JOURNAL OF CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW AND METABOLISM
Volume 24, Issue 10, Pages 1081-1089

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.WCB.0000125887.48838.37

Keywords

acetazolamide; carotid artery occlusion; focal cerebral ischemia; cerebrovascular reserve; oxygen extraction fraction; positron emission tomography

Funding

  1. AHRQ HHS [R03 HS09021-01] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NHLBI NIH HHS [K01 HL03851-01] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cerebrovascular reserve (CVR) and oxygen extraction fraction (OEF) are used to identify hemodynamic compromise in symptomatic patients with carotid occlusive vascular disease, but evidence suggests that they are not equivalent. The authors studied the relationship between CVR and OEF to evaluate their equivalence and stages of hemodynamic compromise. Symptomatic patients (N = 12) with carotid occlusion were studied by stable xenon-computed tomography CBF after intravenous acetazolamide administration for CVR, followed within 24 hours by positron emission tomography (PET) for OEF. Middle cerebral artery territories were analyzed by hemisphere and level. Hemispheric subcortical white matter infarctions were graded with magnetic resonance imaging. Both hemispheric and level analysis of CVR and OEF showed a significant (P = 0.001), negative linear relationship [CVR (%) = -1.5 (OEF) + 83.4, (r = -0.57, P = 0.001, n = 24]. However, 37.5% of the hemispheres showed compromised CVR but normal OEF and were associated (P = 0.019) with subcortical white matter infarction. CMRO2 was elevated in stage II hemodynamic compromise (CVR < 10%, OEF > 50%). CVR and OEF showed a significant negative linear relationship in stage II hemodynamic compromise but revealed hemispheres in hemodynamic compromise by CVR but normal OEF that were associated with subcortical white matter infarction.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available