Ces radiol. 2023, 77(2):103-109 | DOI: 10.55095/CesRadiol2023/012
Imaging acute ischemic stroke: how to refer the finding to the interventional radiologistReview article
- 1 Radiologická klinika FZS UJEP a Krajské zdravotní a.s. - Masarykovy nemocnice v Ústí nad Labem, o.z.
- 2 Radiologická klinika LF UP a FN, Olomouc
- 3 Klinika radiologie a nukleární medicíny LF MU a FN, Brno
- 4 Radiodiagnostické oddělení, Ústřední vojenská nemocnice, Praha
- 5 Radiodiagnostický ústav LF OU a FN, Ostrava
- 6 Radiologická klinika LF UK a FN, Hradec Králové
- 7 Klinika zobrazovacích metod 2. LF UK a FN Motol, Praha
The method of reporting the imaging techniques findings significantly affectsthe necessity of viewing the CT scans by the doctor in comprehensivecerebrovascular centre (CCC). In the case of a long interval when images aresent to the CCC archive, the transport of the patient between stroke centre(SC) and CCC is significantly prolonged.
It is essential to report the extent of ischemic changes in the MCA territoryusing the ASPECTS score. Exclusion of patients from interventional treatmentbased on ASPECTS scores should be approached with caution. It is essential tocorrectly identify the level of occlusion (especially the distinction betweenM1 and M2 of the MCA segments), which co-determines the indication formechanical thrombectomy.
Knowledge of extracranial arteries involvement (stenoses, occlusions) isimportant for the strategy of endovascular surgery. It is appropriate to refer to the anatomy of the carotid arteries with theidentification of the aortic arch type III. and significant looping of thecarotid arteries, which complicate mechanical thrombectomy. These findings arenot a reason to refuse an endovascular procedure.
Keywords: brain ischemia, mechanical thrombectomy, ASPECTS, medial cerebralartery, pseudoocclusion
Published: June 1, 2023 Show citation
| ACS | AIP | APA | ASA | Harvard | Chicago | Chicago Notes | IEEE | ISO690 | MLA | NLM | Turabian | Vancouver |
Cihlář F, Černá M, Hustý J, Charvát F, Jonszta T, Köcher M, et al.. Imaging acute ischemic stroke: how to refer the finding to the interventional radiologist. Ces radiol. 2023;77(2):103-109. doi: 10.55095/CesRadiol2023/012.
References
- 1. Šaňák D, Neumann J, Tomek A, et al. Doporučení pro rekanalizační léčbu akutního mozkového infarktu - verze 2016. Ces Radiol 2016; 70(1): 50-54. 2. Šaňák D, Mikulík R, Tomek A, et al. Doporučení pro mechanickou trombektomii akutního mozkového infarktu - verze 2019. Cesk Slov Neurol N 2019; 82(6): 700-705. 3. Černík D, Cihlář F, Neumann J, et al. Transport strategy for ischaemic stroke patients with large vessel occlusion. Neurol Neurochir Pol 2022; 56(6): 464-471. doi: 10.5603/PJNNS.a2022.0054 [Epub 2022 Jul 28]. 4. Nguyen TN, Abdalkader M, Nagel S, et al. Noncontrast Computed Tomography vs Computed Tomography Perfusion or Magnetic Resonance Imaging Selection in Late Presentation of Stroke With Large-Vessel Occlusion. JAMA Neurol 2022; 79(1): 22-31. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2021.4082 5. Puetz V, Dzialowski I, Hill MD, et al. The Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score in clinical practice: what have we learned? Int J Stroke 2009; 4(5): 354-364. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2009.00337.x 6. Bal S, Bhatia R, Menon BK, et al. Time dependence of reliability of noncontrast computed tomography in comparison to computed tomography angiography source image in acute ischemic stroke. Int J Stroke 2015; 10(1): 55-60. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00859.x [Epub 2012 Sep 13]. 7. Horn N, Kniep H, Broocks G, et al. ASPECTS Interobserver Agreement of 100 Investigators from the TENSION Study. Clin Neuroradiol 2021; 31: 1093-1100. doi: 10.1007/s00062-020-00988-x 8. Sarraj A, Hassan AE, Abraham MG, et al. for the SELECT2 Investigators. Trial of Endovascular Thrombectomy for Large Ischemic Strokes. N Engl J Med 2023; 388: 1259-1271. 9. Ballout AA. Endovascular thrombectomy of large ischemic strokes: Reimagining the boundaries of reperfusion. Interv Neuroradiol 2023; 17: 15910199231170283. doi: 10.1177/15910199231170283 [Online ahead of print]. 10. de Oliveira EP, Fiebach JB, Vagal A, Schaefer PW, Aviv RI. Controversies in Imaging of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review. AJR 2021; 217: 1027-1037. doi.org/10.2214/AJR.21.25846:10.1056/NEJMoa2214403 11. Goyal M, Menon BK, Krings T, et al. What constitutes the M1 segment of the middlecerebral artery? J NeuroIntervent Surg 2016; 0: 1-5. doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-012191 12. Medrano-Martorella S,Pumar-Péreza M, González-Ortiza S, Capellades-Fonta J. A review of the anatomy of the middle cerebral artery for the era of thrombectomy: A radiologic tool based on CT angiography and perfusion CT. Radiología 2021; 63: 505-511. 13. Shapiro M, Raz E, Nossek E, et al. Neuroanatomy of the middle cerebral artery: implications for thrombectomy. J Neurointervent Surg 2020; 12: 768-773. 14. Khatri R, Qureshi MA, Chaudhry MRA, et al. The Angiographic Anatomy of the Sphenoidal Segment of the Middle Cerebral Artery and Its Relevance in Mechanical Thrombectomy. Intervent Neurol 2019; 8: 231-241. 15. Seker F, Pfaff J, Neuberger U, et al. Comparison of Superior and Inferior Division Occlusions Treated with Endovascular Thrombectomy. Clin Neuroradiol 2020; 30(2): 339-343. doi: 10.1007/s00062-019-00767-3 [Epub 2019 Feb 20]. 16. Osborne AG, Hedlund GL, Salzmann KL. Osborn's Brain. Elsevier; 2nd edition. 2017. 17. Harrigan MR, Deveikis JP. Handbook of Cerebrovascular Disease and Neurointerventional Technique. New York: Humana Press 2009. 18. Kappelhof M, Marquering HA, Berkhemer OA, et al. on behalf MR CLEAN Investigators. Accuracy of CT Angiography for Differentiating Pseudo-Occlusion from True Occlusion or High-Grade Stenosis of the Extracranial ICA in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Retrospective MR CLEAN Substudy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2018; 39(5): 892-898. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A5601 [Epub 2018 Apr 5]. 19. Gory B, Piotin M, Haussen DC, et al. TITAN Investigators. Thrombectomy in Acute Stroke With Tandem Occlusions From Dissection Versus Atherosclerotic Cause. Stroke 2017; 48(11): 3145-3148. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.018264 20. Akpinar S, Gelener P, Yilmaz G. Aetiologies of internal carotid artery pseudo-occlusions in acute stroke patients: what neurointerventionalists can expect. Br J Radiol 2017; 90(1070): 20160352. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20160352 21. Grossberg JA, Haussen DC, Cardoso FB et al. Cervical Carotid Pseudo-Occlusions and False Dissections, Intracranial Occlusions Masquerading as Extracranial Occlusions. Stroke 2017; 48: 774-777. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.015427 22. Michel P, Ntaios G, Delgado MG, et al. CT angiography helps to differentiate acute from chronic carotid occlusion: the "carotid ring sign". Neuroradiology 2012; 54(2): 139-146. doi: 10.1007/s00234-011-0868-9 [Epub 2011 Apr 12]. 23. Choi JH, Jang J, Koo J, et al. Multiphasic Computed Tomography Angiography Findings for Identifying Pseudo-Occlusion of the Internal Carotid Artery. Stroke 2020; 51(8): 2558-2562. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.029512 24. Burzotta F, Nerla R, Pirozzolo G, et al. Clinical and procedural impact of aortic arch anatomic variants in carotid stenting procedures. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2015; 86(3): 480-489. doi: 10.1002/ccd.25947 25. Alverne FJAM, Lima FO, Rocha FA, et al. Unfavorable Vascular Anatomy during Endovascular Treatment of Stroke: Challenges and Bailout Strategies. Stroke 2020; 22(2): 185-202. doi: 10.5853/jos.2020.00227 26. Kaesmacher J, Gralla J, Mosimann PJ, et al. Reasons for Reperfusion Failures in Stent-Retriever-Based Thrombectomy: Registry Analysis and Proposal of a Classification System. Am J Neuroradiol 2018; 39(10): 1848-1853. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A5759
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.