4.7 Article

Association of Collateral Status and Ischemic Core Growth in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 96, 期 2, 页码 E161-E170

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000011258

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Collateral status is a major determinant of ischemic core growth, with better collaterals associated with slower core growth rate.
Objective To test the hypothesis that patients with acute ischemic stroke with poorer collaterals would have faster ischemic core growth, we included 2 cohorts in the study: cohort 1 of 342 patients for derivation and cohort 2 of 414 patients for validation. Methods Patients with acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion were included. Core growth rate was calculated by the following equation: core growth rate = acute core volume on CT perfusion (CTP)/time from stroke onset to CTP. Collateral status was assessed by the ratio of severe hypoperfusion volume within the hypoperfusion region of CTP. The CTP collateral index was categorized in tertiles; for each tertile, core growth rate was summarized as median and interquartile range. Simple linear regressions were then performed to measure the predictive power of CTP collateral index in core growth rate. Results For patients allocated to good collateral on CTP (tertile 1 of collateral index), moderate collateral (tertile 2), and poor collateral (tertile 3), the median core growth rate was 2.93 mL/h (1.10-7.94), 8.65 mL/h (4.53-18.13), and 25.41 mL/h (12.83-45.07), respectively. Increments in the collateral index by 1% resulted in an increase of core growth by 0.57 mL/h (coefficient 0.57, 95% confidence interval [0.46, 0.68], p < 0.001). The relationship of core growth and CTP collateral index was validated in cohort 2. An increment in collateral index by 1% resulted in an increase of core growth by 0.59 mL/h (coefficient 0.59 [0.48-0.71], p < 0.001) in cohort 2. Conclusion Collateral status is a major determinant of ischemic core growth.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据