RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: T1-weighted (T1W) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using the delay alternating with nutation for excitation-sampling perfection with application-optimized contrasts using different flip angle evolution (DANTE-SPACE) is the preferred imaging technique for evaluation of the vessel wall. PURPOSE: To evaluate the intra- and inter-rater reproducibility of carotid wall segmentation on T1W DANTE-SPACE in patients with symptomatic (acute stroke or transient ischemic attack) internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective study included 25 patients with acute (≤3 months) stroke or transient ischemic attack and 50%-99% stenosis of the ICA. All patients underwent 3.0-T high-resolution carotid MRI. Two radiologists independently performed the manual segmentation of the vessel wall and inner lumen of the bilateral carotid artery on DANTE-SPACE. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), and Hausdorff distance (HD) were calculated. RESULTS: The ICCs for intra-rater reproducibility of carotid wall volume, inner lumen volume, and normalized wall index were 0.965, 0.990, and 0.962, respectively. The ICCs for inter-rater reproducibility of carotid wall volume, inner lumen, and normalized wall index were 0.856, 0.981, and 0.904. DSC and HD for intra- and inter-rater reproducibility of carotid wall segmentation were as follows: 0.873 and 0.809 (DSC); and 0.079 and 0.118 (HD), respectively. For evaluation of reproducibility only in the carotid artery with symptomatic stenosis, the ICCs for intra- and inter-rater reproducibility indicated all perfect agreement. CONCLUSION: T1W DANTE-SPACE is a reproducible sequence for evaluation of the carotid wall using carotid MRI in patients with symptomatic ICA stenosis.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The ANNEXA-4 trial measured hemostatic efficacy of andexanet alfa in patients with major bleeding taking factor Xa inhibitors. A proportion of this was traumatic and nontraumatic intracranial bleeding. Different measurements were applied in the trial including volumetrics to assess for intracranial bleeding depending on the compartment involved. We aimed to determine the most reliable way to measure intracranial hemorrhage (ICrH) volume by comparing individual brain compartment and total ICrH volume. METHODS: Thirty patients were randomly selected from the ANNEXA-4 database to assess measurement of ICrH volume by compartment and in total. Total and compartmental hemorrhage volumes were measured by five readers using Quantomo software. Each reader measured baseline hemorrhage volumes twice separated by 1 week. Twenty-eight different ANNEXA-4 subjects were also randomly selected to assess intra-rater reliability of total ICrH volume measurement change at baseline and 12-h follow up, performed by three readers twice to assess hemostatic efficacy categories used in ANNEXA-4. RESULTS: Compartmental minimal detectable change percentages (MDC%) ranged between 9.72 and 224.13, with the greatest measurement error occurring in patients with a subdural hemorrhage. Total ICrH volume measurements had the lowest MDC%, which ranged between 6.57 and 33.52 depending on the reader. CONCLUSION: Measurement of total ICrH volumes is more accurate than volume by compartment with less measurement error. Determination of hemostatic efficacy was consistent across readers, and within the same reader, as well as when compared to consensus read. Volumetric analysis of intracranial hemostatic efficacy is feasible and reliable when using total ICrH volumes.