首页> 外文OA文献 >Evaluation of the clinical-diffusion and perfusion-diffusion mismatch models in DEFUSE
【2h】

Evaluation of the clinical-diffusion and perfusion-diffusion mismatch models in DEFUSE

机译:DEFUSE中临床扩散和灌注扩散失配模型的评估

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The perfusion-diffusion mismatch (PDM) model has been proposed as a tool to select acute stroke patients who are most likely to benefit from reperfusion therapy. The clinical-diffusion mismatch (CDM) model is an alternative method that is technically less challenging because it does not require perfusion-weighted imaging. This study is an evaluation of these 2 models in the DEFUSE dataset. METHODS: DEFUSE is an open-label multicenter study in which acute stroke patients were treated with intravenous tPA between 3 and 6 hours after symptoms onset and an MRI was obtained before and 3 to 6 hours after treatment. Presence of PDM and CDM was determined for each patient. RESULTS: Based on conventional predefined mismatch criteria, PDM was present in 54% of the DEFUSE population and CDM in 62%. There was no agreement beyond chance between the 2 mismatch models (kappa 0.07). The presence of PDM was associated with an increased chance of favorable clinical response after reperfusion (OR, 5.4; P=0.039). Reperfusion was not associated with a significant increase in the rate of favorable clinical response in patients with CDM (OR, 2.2; P=0.34). Using optimized mismatch criteria, determined retrospectively based on DEFUSE data, the OR for favorable clinical response was 70 (P=0.001) for PDM and 5.1 (P=0.066) for CDM. CONCLUSIONS: The PDM model appears to be more accurate than the CDM model for selecting patients who are likely to benefit from reperfusion therapy in the 3- to 6-hour time window.
机译:背景与目的:灌注-扩散不匹配(PDM)模型已被提出作为选择最有可能从再灌注治疗中受益的急性中风患者的工具。临床扩散失配(CDM)模型是一种替代方法,由于不需要灌注加权成像,因此在技术上没有什么挑战性。这项研究是对DEFUSE数据集中这两个模型的评估。方法:DEFUSE是一项开放标签的多中心研究,其中急性中风患者在症状发作后3至6小时之间接受静脉tPA治疗,并在治疗前后3至6小时获得MRI。确定每个患者的PDM和CDM的存在。结果:根据传统的预定义失配标准,DEFUSE人口中有54%存在PDM,CDM则有62%。两个失配模型(kappa 0.07)之间没有达成一致的机会。 PDM的存在与再灌注后良好的临床反应机会增加有关(OR,5.4; P = 0.039)。再灌注与CDM患者良好的临床反应率没有显着相关(OR,2.2; P = 0.34)。使用基于DEFUSE数据回顾确定的最佳失配标准,PDM的良好临床反应OR为70(P = 0.001),CDM为5.1(P = 0.066)。结论:PDM模型似乎比CDM模型更准确,用于选择可能在3至6小时的时间窗口内受益于再灌注治疗的患者。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号