Journal of the neurological sciences · 2014
The susceptibility vessel sign at the proximal M1: a strong predictor for poor outcome after intravenous thrombolysis.
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.
Aoki Junya, Kimura Kazumi, Shibazaki Kensaku, Saji Naoki, Uemura Junichi, Sakamoto Yuki, Nagai Koichiro
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Half of acute stroke patients have poor outcomes at 3 months even when treated with intravenous thrombolysis using tissue-plasminogen activator (t-PA) therapy. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of the susceptibility vessel sign (SVS) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) T2* at the proximal portion of the middle cerebral artery (M1 proximal SVS) on clinical outcome in anterior circulation stroke patients treated with t-PA.
METHODS: The presence of the M1 proximal SVS was assessed before t-PA therapy. Good outcome and poor outcome at 3 months were defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2 and 4 to 6, respectively. The predictive values of the M1 proximal SVS for a good and poor outcome were calculated.
RESULTS: 161 patients (median age [interquartile], 76 [67-83] years; male, 91 [57%]) were enrolled. At 3 months after stroke, 68 (42%) patients achieved a good outcome, and 75 (47%) had a poor outcome. The M1 proximal SVS was found in 17 (11%) patients, of whom none (0%) achieved a good outcome, and 16 (94%) had a poor outcome. The sensitivity and positive predictive value of the M1 proximal SVS for good outcome were very low (0.000 and 0.000, respectively). Furthermore, the specificity and positive predictive value of the M1 proximal SVS for poor outcome were very high (0.988 and 0.941, respectively).
CONCLUSION: The M1 proximal SVS appears to be a strong predictor for poor outcome after t-PA therapy.
METHODS: The presence of the M1 proximal SVS was assessed before t-PA therapy. Good outcome and poor outcome at 3 months were defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2 and 4 to 6, respectively. The predictive values of the M1 proximal SVS for a good and poor outcome were calculated.
RESULTS: 161 patients (median age [interquartile], 76 [67-83] years; male, 91 [57%]) were enrolled. At 3 months after stroke, 68 (42%) patients achieved a good outcome, and 75 (47%) had a poor outcome. The M1 proximal SVS was found in 17 (11%) patients, of whom none (0%) achieved a good outcome, and 16 (94%) had a poor outcome. The sensitivity and positive predictive value of the M1 proximal SVS for good outcome were very low (0.000 and 0.000, respectively). Furthermore, the specificity and positive predictive value of the M1 proximal SVS for poor outcome were very high (0.988 and 0.941, respectively).
CONCLUSION: The M1 proximal SVS appears to be a strong predictor for poor outcome after t-PA therapy.