Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 29, Issue 5, pp 2624–2631 | Cite as

Validation of overestimation ratio and TL-SVS as imaging biomarker of cardioembolic stroke and time from onset to MRI

  • Romain BourcierEmail author
  • Laurence Legrand
  • Sébastien Soize
  • Julien Labreuche
  • Marine Beaumont
  • Hubert Desal
  • Imad Derraz
  • Serge Bracard
  • Catherine Oppenheim
  • Olivier Naggara
  • on behalf of the THRACE investigators
Neuro
  • 52 Downloads

Abstract

Objective

We aimed to determine in the “THRACE” trial, the clinical and MRI technical parameters associated with the two-layered susceptibility vessel sign (TL-SVS) and the overestimation ratio (overR).

Materials and methods

Patients with pre-treatment brain gradient echo (GRE) sequence and an etiological work-up were identified. Two readers reviewed TL-SVS, i.e., a SVS with a linear low-intense signal core surrounded by a higher intensity and measured the overR as the width of SVS divided by the width of the artery. Binomial and ordinal logistic regression respectively tested the association between TL-SVS and quartiles of overR with patient characteristics, cardioembolic stroke (CES), time from onset to imaging, and GRE sequence parameters (inter slice gap, slice thickness, echo time, flip angle, voxel size, and field strength).

Results

Among 258 included patients, 102 patients were examined by 3 Tesla MRI and 156 by 1.5 Tesla MRI. Intra- and inter-reader agreements for quartiles of overR and TL-SVS were good to excellent. The median overR was 1.59 (IQR, 1.30 to 1.86). TL-SVS was present in 101 patients (39.2%, 95%CI, 33.1 to 45.1%). In multivariate analysis, only CES was associated with overR quartiles (OR, 1.83; 95%CI, 1.11 to 2.99), and every 60 min increase from onset to MRI time was associated with TL-SVS (OR, 1.72; 95%CI, 1.10 to 2.67). MRI technical parameters were statistically associated with neither overR nor TL-SVS.

Conclusion

Independent of GRE sequence parameters, an increased overR was associated to CES, while the TL-SVS is independently related to a longer time from onset to MRI.

Key Points

• An imaging biomarker would be useful to predict the etiology of stroke in order to adapt secondary prevention of stroke.

• The two-layered susceptibility vessel sign and the overestimation ratio are paramagnetic effect derived markers that vary according to the MRI machines and sequence parameters.

• Independent of sequence parameters, an increased overestimation ratio was associated to cardioembolic stroke, while the two-layered susceptibility vessel sign is independently related to a longer time from onset to MRI.

Keywords

Thrombosis Embolism Magnetic resonance imaging Stroke Biomarkers 

Abbreviations

AIS-LVO

Acute ischemic stroke patients with large vessel occlusion

CES

Cardioembolic stroke

GRE

Gradient echo

overR

Overestimation ratio

SWI

Susceptibility-weighted imaging

THRACE

THRombectomie des Artères CErebrales

TL-SVS

Two-layered susceptibility vessel sign

Notes

Funding

This study was funded by the French Ministry for Health as part of its 2009 STIC program for the support of costly innovations (grant number 2009 A00753-54).

Compliance with ethical standards

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Hubert Desal, head of the Department of Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Nantes France.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

J. Labreuche from the Centre Hospitalier Regional Universitaire de Lille, Biostatistics, Lille, Hauts-de-France, France, kindly provided statistical advice for this manuscript.

Informed consent

Before randomization, written informed consent was obtained from all patients or their legal representatives.

Ethical approval

The study protocol was approved by the Comité de Protection des Personnes III Nord Est Ethics Committee and the research boards of the participating centers.

Methodology

• Prospective

• Diagnostic or prognostic study

• Multicenter study

Disclaimer

The trial steering committee attests to the integrity of the trial, the fidelity of this report to the study protocol, and the completeness and accuracy of the reported data.

Supplementary material

330_2018_5835_MOESM1_ESM.docx (20 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 20 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Goldstein LB, Jones MR, Matchar DB et al (2001) Improving the reliability of stroke subgroup classification using the Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) criteria. Stroke 32:1091–1098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brinjikji W, Duffy S, Burrows A et al (2016) Correlation of imaging and histopathology of thrombi in acute ischemic stroke with etiology and outcome: a systematic review. J Neurointerv Surg 9:529–534Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liebeskind DS, Sanossian N, Yong WH et al (2011) CT and MRI early vessel signs reflect clot composition in acute stroke. Stroke 42:1237–1243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boeckh-Behrens T, Schubert M, Förschler A et al (2016) The impact of histological clot composition in embolic stroke. Clin Neuroradiol 26:189–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim SK, Yoon W, Heo TW, Park MS, Kang HK (2015) Negative susceptibility vessel sign and underlying intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis in acute middle cerebral artery occlusion. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 36:1266–1271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marder VJ, Chute DJ, Starkman S et al (2006) Analysis of thrombi retrieved from cerebral arteries of patients with acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 37:2086–2093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Niesten JM, van der Schaaf IC, van Dam L et al (2014) Histopathologic composition of cerebral thrombi of acute stroke patients is correlated with stroke subtype and thrombus attenuation. PLoS One 9:1266–1271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sallustio F, Koch G, Di Legge S et al (2013) Intra-arterial thrombectomy versus standard intravenous thrombolysis in patients with anterior circulation stroke caused by intracranial arterial occlusions: a single-center experience. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 22:86–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Simons N, Mitchell P, Dowling R, Gonzales M, Yan B (2015) Thrombus composition in acute ischemic stroke: a histopathological study of thrombus extracted by endovascular retrieval. J Neuroradiol 42:86–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rovira A, Orellana P, Alvarez-Sabín J et al (2004) Hyperacute ischemic stroke: middle cerebral artery susceptibility sign at echo-planar gradient-echo MR imaging. Radiology 232:466–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bourcier R, Détraz L, Serfaty JM et al (2017) MRI Interscanner agreement of the association between the susceptibility vessel sign and histologic composition of thrombi. J Neuroimaging 27:577–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Naggara O, Raymond J, Domingo Ayllon M et al (2013) T2* “susceptibility vessel sign” demonstrates clot location and length in acute ischemic stroke. PLoS One 8:1001–1005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Aoki J, Kimura K, Shibazaki K, Sakamoto Y, Saji N, Uemura J (2013) Location of the susceptibility vessel sign on T2*-weighted MRI and early recanalization within 1 hour after tissue plasminogen activator administration. Cerebrovasc Dis Extra 3:111–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bourcier R, Volpi S, Guyomarch B et al (2015) Susceptibility vessel sign on MRI predicts favorable clinical outcome in patients with anterior circulation acute stroke treated with mechanical thrombectomy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 36:2346–2353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cho KH, Kim JS, Kwon SU, Cho AH, Kang DW (2005) Significance of susceptibility vessel sign on T2*-weighted gradient echo imaging for identification of stroke subtypes. Stroke 36:2379–2383Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schellinger PD, Chalela JA, Kang DW, Latour LL, Warach S (2005) Diagnostic and prognostic value of early MR imaging vessel signs in hyperacute stroke patients imaged <3 hours and treated with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 26:618–624Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Soize S, Batista AL, Rodriguez Regent C et al (2015) Susceptibility vessel sign on T2* magnetic resonance imaging and recanalization results of mechanical thrombectomy with stent retrievers: a multicentre cohort study. Eur J Neurol 22:967–972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bourcier R, Derraz I, Delasalle B et al (2018) Susceptibility vessel sign and cardioembolic etiology in the THRACE trial. Clin Neuroradiol 8:1001–1005Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhang R, Zhou Y, Liu C et al (2017) Overestimation of susceptibility vessel sign: a predictive marker of stroke cause. Stroke 48:1993–1996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yamamoto N, Satomi J, Tada Y et al (2015) Two-layered susceptibility vessel sign on 3-tesla T2*-weighted imaging is a predictive biomarker of stroke subtype. Stroke 46:269–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yan S, Chen Q, Zhang X et al (2016) Extensive blooming artifact predicts no recanalization after intravenous thrombolysis. Eur J Neurol 23:737–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hodel J, Rodallec M, Gerber S et al (2012) Susceptibility weighted magnetic resonance sequences “SWAN, SWI and VenoBOLD”: technical aspects and clinical applications. J Neuroradiol 39:71–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bracard S, Ducrocq X, Mas JL et al (2016) Mechanical thrombectomy after intravenous alteplase versus alteplase alone after stroke (THRACE): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol 15:1138–1147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Adams HP Jr, Bendixen BH, Kappelle LJ et al (1993) Classification of subtype of acute ischemic stroke. Definitions for use in a multicenter clinical trial. TOAST. Trial of Org 10172 in acute stroke treatment. Stroke 24:35–41Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    European Stroke Organisation (ESO) Executive Committee, ESO Writing Committee (2008) Guidelines for management of ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack 2008. Cerebrovasc Dis 25:457–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cho KY, Miyoshi H, Kuroda S et al (2013) The phenotype of infiltrating macrophages influences arteriosclerotic plaque vulnerability in the carotid artery. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 22:910–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shaikh S, Brittenden J, Lahiri R, Brown PA, Thies F, Wilson HM (2012) Macrophage subtypes in symptomatic carotid artery and femoral artery plaques. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 44:491–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nosaka M, Ishida Y, Kimura A, Kondo T (2010) Time-dependent organic changes of intravenous thrombi in stasis-induced deep vein thrombosis model and its application to thrombus age determination. Forensic Sci Int 195:143–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Park MG, Oh SJ, Baik SK, Jung DS, Park KP (2016) Susceptibility-weighted imaging for detection of thrombus in acute cardioembolic stroke. J Stroke 18:73–79Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Emeriau S, Serre I, Toubas O, Pombourcq F, Oppenheim C, Pierot L (2013) Can diffusion-weighted imaging-fluid-attenuated inversion recovery mismatch (positive diffusion-weighted imaging/negative fluid-attenuated inversion recovery) at 3 Tesla identify patients with stroke at <4.5 hours? Stroke 44:1647–1651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yan S, Liu K, Tong L, Yu Y, Zhang S, Lou M (2016) Different risk factors for poor outcome between patients with positive and negative susceptibility vessel sign. J Neurointerv Surg 8:1001–1005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nielsen VG, Kirklin JK, Holman WL, Steenwyk BL (2009) Clot lifespan model analysis of the effects of warfarin on thrombus growth and fibrinolysis: role of contact protein and tissue factor initiation. ASAIO J 55:33–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Romain Bourcier
    • 1
    Email author
  • Laurence Legrand
    • 2
  • Sébastien Soize
    • 3
    • 4
  • Julien Labreuche
    • 5
  • Marine Beaumont
    • 6
  • Hubert Desal
    • 1
  • Imad Derraz
    • 7
  • Serge Bracard
    • 8
  • Catherine Oppenheim
    • 2
  • Olivier Naggara
    • 2
    • 9
  • on behalf of the THRACE investigators
  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional NeuroradiologyGuillaume et René Laennec University HospitalNantesFrance
  2. 2.Department of NeuroradiologyUniversité Paris-Descartes. INSERM U894, Sainte-Anne HospitalParisFrance
  3. 3.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional NeuroradiologyUniversity Hospital of ReimsReimsFrance
  4. 4.INSERM UMR-S 1237 Physiopathology and imaging of neurological disordersUniversité Caen NormandieCaenFrance
  5. 5.Centre Hospitalier Regional Universitaire de Lille, BiostatisticsLilleFrance
  6. 6.CIC1433, INSERM, IADI, U1254Université de Lorraine, INSERM, CHRU de Nancy CIC-IT NancyNancyFrance
  7. 7.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional NeuroradiologyHopital Gui de ChauillacMontpellierFrance
  8. 8.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional NeuroradiologyUniversity Hospital of NancyNancyFrance
  9. 9.Pediatric Radiology Department, Necker Enfants MaladesParisFrance

Personalised recommendations