3 years ago

Cervical Internal Carotid Occlusion versus Pseudo-occlusion at CT Angiography in the Context of Acute Stroke: An Accuracy, Interobserver, and Intraobserver Agreement Study.

Naïm Khoury, Ange Diouf, Marc Kotowski, David Landry, Mehdi Gaha, Alain Weill, François Guilbert, Jean Raymond, Robert Fahed, Miguel Chagnon, Daniel Roy
Purpose To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of computed tomographic (CT) angiography to distinguish true cervical internal carotid artery (ICA) occlusion from pseudo-occlusion (defined as an isolated intracranial thrombus that impedes ascending blood flow) in the context of acute stroke. Materials and Methods This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent thrombectomy with preprocedural CT angiography that helps to demonstrate a lack of attenuation in the cervical ICA on the symptomatic side (24 men and 13 women; mean age, 63 years; age range, 30-86 years). Seven readers, including five neuroradiologists and two interventional neuroradiology fellows, independently reviewed the CT angiography images to assess whether there was true cervical ICA occlusion. Their results were compared with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the reference standard. Sensitivity and specificity for detecting true occlusion as well as accuracy and diagnostic odds ratio were calculated, with inter- and intraobserver κ statistics. Results Cervical ICA pseudo-occlusion occurred in 12 of 37 patients (32.4%) with nonattenuation of the cervical ICA on the symptomatic side. Interobserver agreement coefficients did not reach the substantial value of 0.61 for either pairs or groups of readers. The cohort's average sensitivity and specificity was 68% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 59%, 76%) and 75% (95% CI: 71%, 80%), respectively, with a diagnostic odds ratio of 8 (95% CI: 3, 18) and only fair interobserver agreement (κ = 0.32; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.47). Conclusion In the context of acute ischemic stroke with ipsilateral ICA nonattenuation at single-phase CT angiography, even specialized radiologists may not reliably distinguish true cervical occlusion from pseudo-occlusion. (©) RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Publisher URL: http://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017170681

DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2017170681

You might also like
Discover & Discuss Important Research

Keeping up-to-date with research can feel impossible, with papers being published faster than you'll ever be able to read them. That's where Researcher comes in: we're simplifying discovery and making important discussions happen. With over 19,000 sources, including peer-reviewed journals, preprints, blogs, universities, podcasts and Live events across 10 research areas, you'll never miss what's important to you. It's like social media, but better. Oh, and we should mention - it's free.

  • Download from Google Play
  • Download from App Store
  • Download from AppInChina

Researcher displays publicly available abstracts and doesn’t host any full article content. If the content is open access, we will direct clicks from the abstracts to the publisher website and display the PDF copy on our platform. Clicks to view the full text will be directed to the publisher website, where only users with subscriptions or access through their institution are able to view the full article.