Abstract 182: "Spot" Sign vs "Dot" Sign as Predictor of Hemorrhagic Stroke Outcomes
Introduction: Hematoma expansion (HE) is an established predictor of mortality and poor functional outcome after intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). The computed tomography angiography (CTA) “spot” sign predicts HE and deterioration. The “dot” sign on delayed post-contrast CT (PCCT) has undetermined clinical significance but is thought to represent a slower rate of bleeding than the “spot” sign. We aimed to compare the sensitivity of a “dot” sign with the “spot” sign and establish the clinical significance of the “dot” sign.
Methods: Patients with ICH presenting to our center July 2008-May 2013 were identified from our stroke registry. Only patients with baseline CT, CTA and PCCT and follow-up CT 6-36 hours later were included. Patients with clot evacuation between baseline and follow-up CT were excluded. HE was defined as 1) any ≥ 1cc increase and 2) significant ≥ 12.5cc increase or >33% increase in volume. Differences in cohort characteristics were assessed using appropriate statistical tests and sensitivity was calculated from 2x2 tables. Unadjusted logistic regression models were used to investigate the relation of “spot” and “dot” signs with HE and poor functional outcome (discharge mRS 4-6).
Results: Of the 210 ICH patients included in the analyses (median age 61, 44.7% female, 66.2% black), 39 (18.5%) patients had a PCCT “dot” sign and 19 (9%) had a CTA “spot” sign. Significant HE occurred in 15% with “dot” sign and 8% with “spot” sign. The PCCT “dot” sign had a sensitivity of 0.52 in predicting significant HE and a sensitivity of 0.69 in predicting discharge mRS 4-6 (compared with 0.24 and 0.30 for “spot” sign, respectively). Patients with a “dot” sign, but without a “spot” sign, had significantly increased odds of any HE (OR 5.7, 95% CI 1.9-17.8, p=0.003), mRS 4-6 (OR 8.1, 95% CI 1.03-64.6, p=0.048), and death (OR 8.1, 95% CI 1.4-48.4, p=0.02), but not significant HE (OR 2.2, 95% CI 0.7-6.7, p=0.15).
Conclusions: The PCCT “dot” sign was more sensitive in predicting hematoma expansion than the CTA “spot” sign and predicted hematoma expansion and poor functional outcome even in the absence of the “spot sign.” The utility of PCCT imaging in acute evaluation of ICH patients requires validation, but our study supports clinical relevance of the “dot” sign.
Author Disclosures: K.O. Brag: None. E. Jones: None. D. Monlezun: None. A. George: None. M. Halstead: None. S. Martin-Schild: None. R. El Khoury: None.
- © 2014 by American Heart Association, Inc.