Stroke · 2016
Clinical Significance of Fluid-Attenuated Inversion Recovery Vascular Hyperintensities in Borderzone Infarcts.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kim Si Eun, Lee Byung In, Kim Sung Eun, Shin Kyong Jin, Park JinSe, Park Kang Min, Kim Hyung Chan, Lee Joonwon, Baek Hye Jin, Jin Sung-Cheol, Ha Sam Yeol
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery vascular hyperintensities (FVHs) are seen in some cases with cerebral hemodynamic impairment and collateral flow. Because the worst outcomes of patients with borderzone infarcts were mainly correlated with impaired hemodynamics, the presence of FVH might provide another clue for predicting the prognosis of patients with borderzone infarcts.
METHODS: We reviewed 1377 consecutive patients with ischemic stroke. Cortical borderzone (CBZ) and internal borderzone infarcts were selected based on diffusion-weighted imaging. FVHs were defined as tubular- or serpentine-shaped hyperintensities in the subarachnoid space. We investigated the clinical significance of FVHs in borderzone-infarcted patients.
RESULTS: Among 87 patients with borderzone infarcts, the presence of FVH was observed in 30 (34.5%). We identified 62 patients with CBZ infarcts and 25 patients with internal borderzone infarcts. In the cases with CBZ infarcts, the initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores and the portions of nonfavorable outcome at 3 months in the FVH(+) group were significantly higher than in the FVH(-) group (P<0.05 and P<0.001, respectively). Unlike the cases with CBZ infarcts, there were no significant differences of these clinical features between the FVH(+) group and the FVH(-) group in the patients with internal borderzone infarcts.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of FVH are associated with relatively severe clinical presentation and nonfavorable prognosis in patients with CBZ infarcts, but not in patients with internal borderzone infarcts. The presence of FVH may help to identify CBZ-infarcted patients who require close observation and hemodynamic control.
METHODS: We reviewed 1377 consecutive patients with ischemic stroke. Cortical borderzone (CBZ) and internal borderzone infarcts were selected based on diffusion-weighted imaging. FVHs were defined as tubular- or serpentine-shaped hyperintensities in the subarachnoid space. We investigated the clinical significance of FVHs in borderzone-infarcted patients.
RESULTS: Among 87 patients with borderzone infarcts, the presence of FVH was observed in 30 (34.5%). We identified 62 patients with CBZ infarcts and 25 patients with internal borderzone infarcts. In the cases with CBZ infarcts, the initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores and the portions of nonfavorable outcome at 3 months in the FVH(+) group were significantly higher than in the FVH(-) group (P<0.05 and P<0.001, respectively). Unlike the cases with CBZ infarcts, there were no significant differences of these clinical features between the FVH(+) group and the FVH(-) group in the patients with internal borderzone infarcts.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of FVH are associated with relatively severe clinical presentation and nonfavorable prognosis in patients with CBZ infarcts, but not in patients with internal borderzone infarcts. The presence of FVH may help to identify CBZ-infarcted patients who require close observation and hemodynamic control.