Prediction of Early Arterial Recanalization and Tissue Fate in the Selection of Patients With the Greatest Potential to Benefit From Intravenous Tissue-Type Plasminogen Activator
Background and Purpose—Our objective is to determine the performance of the combination of likelihood of arterial recanalization and tissue fate to predict functional clinical outcome in patients with acute stroke.
Methods—Clinical, imaging, and outcome data were collected in 173 patients with acute ischemic stroke who presented within 4.5 hours from symptom onset, in the time window eligible for intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator. Imaging data included Alberta Score Program Early Computed Tomographic Score (ASPECTS), site of occlusion, volume of ischemic core and penumbra, and recanalization. Outcome data consisted of modified Rankin Scale score at 90 days. We classified patients based on their baseline imaging characteristics and treatment with intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator (yes/no) according to 5 different hypothetical prognostic algorithms: (1) based on whether patients received intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator, (2) based on ASPECTS, (3) based on the site of occlusion, (4) based on volume of ischemic core and penumbra, and (5) based on a matrix of predicted recanalization and volume of ischemic core and penumbra. We compared the performance of such algorithms to predict good clinical outcome, defined as modified Rankin Scale score of ≤2 at 90 days.
Results—One hundred and twenty-four patients received intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator; 49 did not. In the group that was treated, 46 (37%) had good outcome as opposed to 38.7% in the nontreated. The algorithm that combined the prediction of recanalization with the volume of ischemic core and penumbra showed the highest accuracy to predict good outcome (77.7%) as opposed to others (range, 43.9%–57.2%)
Conclusions—The combination of predicted recanalization and tissue fate proved superior to prognosticate good clinical outcome when compared with other usual predictors.
- Received August 6, 2015.
- Revision received November 10, 2015.
- Accepted November 11, 2015.
- © 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.