RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Limited research exists regarding the impact of neuroimaging on endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) decisions for late-window cases of large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke. OBJECTIVE: T0 assess whether perfusion CT imaging: (1) alters the proportion of recommendations for EVT, and (2) enhances the reliability of EVT decision-making compared with non-contrast CT and CT angiography. METHODS: We conducted a survey using 30 patients drawn from an institutional database of 3144 acute stroke cases. These were presented to 29 Canadian physicians with and without perfusion imaging. We used non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals and difference in agreement classification as criteria to suggest a difference between the Gwet AC1 statistics (κG). RESULTS: The percentage of EVT recommendations differed by 1.1% with or without perfusion imaging. Individual decisions changed in 21.4% of cases (11.3% against EVT and 10.1% in favor). Inter-rater agreement (κG) among the 29 raters was similar between non-perfusion and perfusion CT neuroimaging (κG=0.487; 95% CI 0.327 to 0.647 and κG=0.552; 95% CI 0.430 to 0.675). The 95% CIs overlapped with moderate agreement in both. Intra-rater agreement exhibited overlapping 95% CIs for all 28 raters. κG was either substantial or excellent (0.81-1) for 71.4% (20/28) of raters in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the minimal difference in overall EVT recommendations with either neuroimaging protocol one in five decisions changed with perfusion imaging. Regarding agreement we found that the use of automated CT perfusion images does not significantly impact the reliability of EVT decisions for patients with late-window LVO.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend the treatment of emergent large vessel ischemic stroke (ELVIS) patients presenting beyond 6 hours of last known well time with endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) based on perfusion computed tomography (CT) neuroimaging. We compared the outcomes (long-term good clinical outcomes, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and mortality) of ELVIS patients according to the type of CT neuroimaging they underwent. METHODS: We searched the following databases: Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and Scopus from January 1, 2015, to June 14, 2023. We included studies of late-presenting ELVIS patients undergoing EVT that had with data for non-perfusion and perfusion CT neuroimaging. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Data were pooled using a random effects model. RESULTS: We found 7 observational cohorts. Non-perfusion versus perfusion CT was not statistically significantly different for both long-term clinical (n = 3,224; RR: 0.96; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.06; I2 = 18%) and sICH (n = 3,724; RR: 1.08 95% CI 0.60 to 1.94; I2 = 76%). Perfusion CT had less mortality (n = 3874; RR: 1.22; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.40; I2 = 0%). The certainty of these findings is very low because of limitations in the risk of bias, indirectness, and imprecision domains of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations. CONCLUSION: The use of either non-perfusion or perfusion CT neuroimaging may have little to no effect on long-term clinical outcomes and sICH for late-presenting EVT patients. Perfusion CT neuroimaging may be associated with a reduced the risk of mortality. Evidence uncertainty warrants randomized trial data.
