| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Stroke. 2007;38:194.)
© 2007 American Heart Association, Inc.
Research Reports |
From the Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging (N.M.M., H.A., M.W.Z., C.J.L., A.G.S.), Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and the Harvard-Massachusetts Institute of Technology Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Boston, Mass; the Stroke Service (H.A., A.B.S., W.J.K.), Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass; and the Departments of Clinical Radiology and Neurology (J.O.K., Y.L., J.N.), Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland; and Functional Brain Imaging Unit, Helsinki Brain Research Center, Finland; Centre for Military Medicine, Finnish Defence Forces, Helsinki, Finland; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Turku, Finland (H.J.A.).
Correspondence to A. Gregory Sorensen, MD, Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Bldg 149, 13th St (2301), Charlestown, MA 02129. E-mail sorensen{at}nmr.mgh.harvard.edu
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods— We developed atlases consisting of location-weighted values indicating the relative importance in terms of neurological deficit severity for every voxel of the brain. These atlases were applied to 80 first-ever ischemic stroke patients to produce estimates of clinical deficit severity. Each patient had an MRI and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) examination just before or soon after hospital discharge. The correlation between the location-based deficit predictions and measured neurological deficit (NIHSS) scores were compared with the correlation obtained using volume alone to predict the neurological deficit.
Results— Volume-based estimates of neurological deficit severity were only moderately correlated with measured NIHSS scores (r=0.62). The combination of volume and location resulted in a significantly better correlation with clinical deficit severity (r=0.79, P=0.032).
Conclusions— The atlas methodology is a feasible way of integrating infarct size and location to predict stroke severity. It can estimate stroke severity better than volume alone.
Key Words: infarcts magnetic resonance imaging models outcome statistical stroke
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Imaging
T2-weighted MR images were obtained at 1.5T using a fast spin echo sequence with 25 axial slices, repetition time=4000 to 6300 ms, echo time=100 to 110 ms, in-plane resolution=0.9 to 1.0 mm, and section thickness=5 mm. A neuroradiologist manually outlined each infarct to create a binary mask (1=lesion, 0=no lesion) using Alice (Hayden Imaging Processing Solutions). Datasets were coregistered using FLIRT (FMRIB). The resulting binarized lesion datasets had a resolution of 2 mm.3
Atlases
Three types of brain atlases were constructed. First, experience-based knowledge about compartmentalization of brain function was incorporated by developing an "expert" atlas (EXPERT). This atlas consisted of the following anatomical regions that were manually outlined on MR images: prefrontal cortex, frontal eye field, Broca area, premotor, precentral and postcentral gyri, occipital lobe, dorsomedial parietal cortex, posterior parietal cortex, lateral temporal lobe, corona radiata and subcortical white matter, caudate nucleus, insula, lenticular nucleus, thalamus, external capsule, internal capsule (anterior and posterior limbs), hippocampus, mesencephalon, cerebellum, pons, and medulla. These regions were chosen because clinical syndromes associated with infarction of them are relatively well described. Two stroke neurologists (H.A., W.J.K.), blinded to the imaging data, independently assigned to each region the maximum NIHSSS thought to result from an infarction spanning that entire region. Where discrepant, the average score was chosen.
Each voxel value in EXPERT was calculated by dividing the weight of the region it resided in by the number of voxels in that region: equation
|
|
where i refers to the ith voxel location. This atlas of voxel values was then multiplied (overlapped) by each patients binarized MRI (ie, outlined infarct on MRI) and the resulting voxel values summed to estimate the NIHSSS (Atlas Score) for each patient, j: equation
|
|
A second, purely data-driven, atlas was also developed. In this model, each voxel in a given patients binarized MRI dataset was assigned a weight by multiplying by that patients corresponding NIHSSS and dividing by the lesion volume. The resulting datasets were averaged to produce an atlas in which each voxel value was determined by: equation
|
|
where Ni is the number of infarcted voxels at the ith voxel location across the study population, and NIHSSSj and Infarct Volumej are the NIHSSS and the infarct volume for the jth patient. In order to eliminate bias, leave-one-out cross-validation (jacknifing) was used so that the data-driven atlas applied to a given patient was developed from the remaining patients.
Third, a hybrid atlas (HYBRID) was developed, in which patient data were used to modify the weights assigned to the regions designated in EXPERT using linear least squares regression (Matlab, Mathworks): equation
|
|
for j = 1 to number of patients, where
j,k is the volume fraction of the kth region occupied by the jth infarct. Jacknifing was used such that the HYBRID atlas applied to a given patient was developed from the remaining patients.
Statistics
In order to gauge the impact of location, linear regression was used to develop estimates using lesion volume alone (VOLUME scores) such that, for each patient: equation
|
|
where
j and βj were determined by linearly regressing infarct volumes against NIHSSSs of the remaining patients. Correlation analysis was performed for VOLUME scores versus NIHSSS and atlas scores (EXPERT, data-driven, HYBRID) versus NIHSSS by computing Pearson correlation coefficient and comparing the 2 correlation coefficients using Fisher r-to-Z transformation. P<0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The agreement between examiners in assigning a NIHSSS to each designated brain region was excellent (weighted
=0.98). The correlation coefficient between infarct volume and NIHSSS was 0.65. The correlation between EXPERT scores and clinically measured NIHSSS was r=0.78. This correlation was significantly higher than the correlation using volume alone to estimate NIHSSS (r=0.62 using VOLUME scores, P=0.047 comparing the 2 correlation coefficients; Figures 1 and 2
). The correlation between the data-driven atlas estimates and clinically measured NIHSSS was r=0.69, an improvement over volume that did not reach statistical significance for this sample size (n=80). The correlation between HYBRID scores and NIHSSS, r=0.79 (Figure 1), was slightly better than EXPERT and significantly higher than the volume-based correlation (P=0.032).
|
|
Left-hemisphere deficits were better estimated by volume (r=0.71 for VOLUME scores versus NIHSSS) than right-hemisphere deficits (r=0.51), analyzed separately. HYBRID scores outperformed VOLUME scores in both hemispheres (Figure 3), but this did not reach statistical significance for the given sample sizes.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In the current study, there was left-to-right asymmetry in which voxels in the left hemisphere were associated with higher atlas values than those in the right hemisphere. This is attributable to the fact that left (dominant) hemisphere functions are more heavily weighted by the NIHSS3–5 and underscores that accounting for the impact of volume or location on clinical deficit severity is inextricably linked to the scale used. Despite these limitations, the NIHSS is the most widely used neurological scale in clinical research studies. However, the atlas methodology outlined here does not have to be used in conjunction with the NIHSS; it can be used with other scales. By substituting more targeted neurological or cognitive measures for the NIHSS, the atlas methodology can help identify the relative impact that different anatomical regions have on specific neurological functions.
The choice of a time at which to perform structural or functional correlation is inherently challenging. The current study used the subacute timepoint to perform structure-function correlations because the damage pattern seen on imaging presumably closely corresponds to the measured neurological deficit. The impact of this study, though, lies in the ability to translate the results to the acute timeframe, in which final outcome prediction can affect treatment decisions. In this respect, the atlas technique developed here can be combined with tissue outcome predictive models,6 which aim to identify potentially salvageable tissue based on acute MRI data, so that the potential clinical impact of salvaging or not salvaging the ischemic brain tissue in a given patient can be assessed acutely.
Although the location of a lesion clearly plays a role in its neurological impact, many brain functions are not anatomically distinct. Activation studies have confirmed that normal brain functions often require an intact network of anatomically distinct areas working in concert.7 Improved estimation of functional outcome requires knowledge of the sophisticated networks that connect different brain regions. Future work with larger data sets could address these issues by incorporating knowledge of functional networks. Such studies in different patient cohorts would also address reproducibility and reliability of the current findings.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
This work was supported in part by Public Health Service grant R01NS38477, the National Center for Research Resources (P41RR14075) and the Mental Illness and Neuroscience Discovery Institute. Dr Koroshetz and the Massachusetts General Hospital Stroke Database are supported by Public Health Service grant R01HS011392. Massachusetts General Hospital has filed a patent application on the use of the atlas algorithm; this application lists Drs Menezes, Ay, and Sorensen as inventors.
Disclosures
None.
Received April 29, 2006; revision received July 26, 2006; accepted August 16, 2006.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) rt-PA Stroke Study Group. Effect of intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator on ischemic stroke lesion size measured by computed tomography. Stroke. 2000; 12: 2912–2999.
3. Lyden P, Claesson L, Havstad S, Ashwood T, Lu M. Factor analysis of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale in patients with large strokes. Arch Neurol. 2004; 61: 1677–1680.
4. Fink JN, Selim MH, Kumar S, Silver B, Linfante I, Caplan LR, Schlaug G. Is the association of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores and acute magnetic resonance imaging stroke volume equal for patients with right- and left-hemisphere ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2002; 33: 954–958.
5. Woo D, Broderick JP, Kothari RU, Lu M, Brott T, Lyden PD, Marler JR, Grotta JC. Does the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale favor left hemisphere strokes. Stroke. 1999; 30: 2355–2359.
6. Wu O, Koroshetz WJ, Ostergaard L, Buonanno FS, Copen WA, Gonzalez RG, Rordorf G, Rosen BR, Schwamm LH, Weisskoff RM, Sorensen AG. Predicting tissue outcome in acute human cerebral ischemia using combined diffusion- and perfusion-weighted MR imaging. Stroke. 2001; 32: 933–942.
7. Luft AR, Waller S, Forrester L, Smith GV, Whitall J, Macko RF, Schulz JB, Hanley DF. Lesion location alters brain activation in chronically impaired stroke survivors. Neuroimage. 2004; 21: 924–935.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. E. Hillis, L. Gold, V. Kannan, L. Cloutman, J. T. Kleinman, M. Newhart, J. Heidler-Gary, C. Davis, E. Aldrich, R. Llinas, et al. Site of the ischemic penumbra as a predictor of potential for recovery of functions Neurology, July 15, 2008; 71(3): 184 - 189. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. G. Merino, L. L. Latour, J. W. Todd, M. Luby, P. D. Schellinger, D.-W. Kang, and S. Warach Lesion Volume Change After Treatment With Tissue Plasminogen Activator Can Discriminate Clinical Responders From Nonresponders Stroke, November 1, 2007; 38(11): 2919 - 2923. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. H. Lev CT/NIHSS Mismatch for Detection of Salvageable Brain in Acute Stroke Triage Beyond the 3-Hour Time Window: Overrated or Undervalued? Stroke, July 1, 2007; 38(7): 2028 - 2029. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Stroke Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 2007 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |