Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

AJNR Awards, New Junior Editors, and more. Read the latest AJNR updates

Research ArticleNeurointervention

Value of Quantitative Collateral Scoring on CT Angiography in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke

A.M.M. Boers, R. Sales Barros, I.G.H. Jansen, O.A. Berkhemer, L.F.M. Beenen, B.K. Menon, D.W.J. Dippel, A. van der Lugt, W.H. van Zwam, Y.B.W.E.M. Roos, R.J. van Oostenbrugge, C.H. Slump, C.B.L.M. Majoie and H.A. Marquering on behalf of the MR CLEAN investigators
American Journal of Neuroradiology April 2018, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5623
A.M.M. Boers
aFrom the Departments of Biomedical Engineering and Physics (A.M.M.B., R.S.B., I.G.H.J., H.A.M.)
bRadiology and Nuclear Medicine (A.M.M.B., I.G.H.J., O.A.B., L.F.M.B., C.B.L.M.M., H.A.M.)
dDepartment of Robotics and Mechatronics (A.M.M.B., C.H.S.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for A.M.M. Boers
R. Sales Barros
aFrom the Departments of Biomedical Engineering and Physics (A.M.M.B., R.S.B., I.G.H.J., H.A.M.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for R. Sales Barros
I.G.H. Jansen
aFrom the Departments of Biomedical Engineering and Physics (A.M.M.B., R.S.B., I.G.H.J., H.A.M.)
bRadiology and Nuclear Medicine (A.M.M.B., I.G.H.J., O.A.B., L.F.M.B., C.B.L.M.M., H.A.M.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for I.G.H. Jansen
O.A. Berkhemer
bRadiology and Nuclear Medicine (A.M.M.B., I.G.H.J., O.A.B., L.F.M.B., C.B.L.M.M., H.A.M.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for O.A. Berkhemer
L.F.M. Beenen
bRadiology and Nuclear Medicine (A.M.M.B., I.G.H.J., O.A.B., L.F.M.B., C.B.L.M.M., H.A.M.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for L.F.M. Beenen
B.K. Menon
fDepartment of Clinical Neurosciences (B.K.M.), Hotchkiss Brain Institute, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Foothills Hospital, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for B.K. Menon
D.W.J. Dippel
gDepartments of Neurology (D.W.J.D.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for D.W.J. Dippel
A. van der Lugt
hRadiology (A.v.d.L.), Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for A. van der Lugt
W.H. van Zwam
iDepartment of Radiology (W.H.v.Z.), Maastricht UMC, Maastricht, the Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for W.H. van Zwam
Y.B.W.E.M. Roos
cNeurology (Y.B.W.E.M.R.), Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Y.B.W.E.M. Roos
R.J. van Oostenbrugge
jDepartment of Neurology (R.J.v.O.), Maastricht UMC and Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for R.J. van Oostenbrugge
C.H. Slump
dDepartment of Robotics and Mechatronics (A.M.M.B., C.H.S.)
eMIRA Institute for Biomedical Engineering and Technical Medicine (C.H.S.), University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for C.H. Slump
C.B.L.M. Majoie
aFrom the Departments of Biomedical Engineering and Physics (A.M.M.B., R.S.B., I.G.H.J., H.A.M.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for C.B.L.M. Majoie
H.A. Marquering
aFrom the Departments of Biomedical Engineering and Physics (A.M.M.B., R.S.B., I.G.H.J., H.A.M.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for H.A. Marquering
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Many studies have emphasized the relevance of collateral flow in patients presenting with acute ischemic stroke. Our aim was to evaluate the relationship of the quantitative collateral score on baseline CTA with the outcome of patients with acute ischemic stroke and test whether the timing of the CTA acquisition influences this relationship.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: From the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN) data base, all baseline thin-slice CTA images of patients with acute ischemic stroke with intracranial large-vessel occlusion were retrospectively collected. The quantitative collateral score was calculated as the ratio of the vascular appearance of both hemispheres and was compared with the visual collateral score. Primary outcomes were 90-day mRS score and follow-up infarct volume. The relation with outcome and the association with treatment effect were estimated. The influence of the CTA acquisition phase on the relation of collateral scores with outcome was determined.

RESULTS: A total of 442 patients were included. The quantitative collateral score strongly correlated with the visual collateral score (ρ = 0.75) and was an independent predictor of mRS (adjusted odds ratio = 0.81; 95% CI, .77–.86) and follow-up infarct volume (exponent β = 0.88; P < .001) per 10% increase. The quantitative collateral score showed areas under the curve of 0.71 and 0.69 for predicting functional independence (mRS 0–2) and follow-up infarct volume of >90 mL, respectively. We found significant interaction of the quantitative collateral score with the endovascular therapy effect in unadjusted analysis on the full ordinal mRS scale (P = .048) and on functional independence (P = .049). Modification of the quantitative collateral score by acquisition phase on outcome was significant (mRS: P = .004; follow-up infarct volume: P < .001) in adjusted analysis.

CONCLUSIONS: Automated quantitative collateral scoring in patients with acute ischemic stroke is a reliable and user-independent measure of the collateral capacity on baseline CTA and has the potential to augment the triage of patients with acute stroke for endovascular therapy.

ABBREVIATIONS:

EVT
endovascular therapy
FIV
follow-up infarct volume
ICA-T
ICA carotid bifurcation
IQR
interquartile range
MR CLEAN
Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands
qCS
quantitative collateral score
vCS
visual collateral score

Several large, randomized, controlled trials have proved the benefit of endovascular therapy (EVT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke with intracranial large-vessel occlusion.1⇓⇓⇓⇓–6 Nevertheless, most patients remain functionally disabled despite successful recanalization. Many studies have emphasized the relevance of the assessment of collateral flow on baseline imaging to identify patients who would potentially benefit from EVT.7⇓⇓–10 Until now, a patient's collateral status at baseline is the only proved treatment-effect modifier.9 Accordingly, a recent randomized EVT trial even used the collateral capacity as an inclusion criterion, with the assumption that patients with poor collaterals will not benefit from treatment.4 For assessment of collateral flow in the acute setting, single-phase CTA is the most widely used imaging technique. Unfortunately, research regarding the value of the collateral capacity and its clinical applicability on CTA is limited by scoring methods that use coarse subjective scales susceptible to relatively poor interobserver agreement.11 Hence, standardization is needed.12

An issue with single-phase CTA is that collateral assessment using this technique is heavily influenced by the timing of the CTA snapshot. Acquiring CTA too early after contrast bolus administration runs the risk of underestimating collateral capacity, while a delayed venous phase scan may hamper detection of the primary occlusion.

Recently, we introduced a technique to automatically quantify a patient's collateral capacity on single-phase CTA.13 The aim of this study was to assess whether this quantitative measure has the potential to accurately assess collateral capacity on CTA. We also investigated its relation with radiologic and clinical outcomes in the study population of the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN).1 Furthermore, we aimed to examine whether the timing of this CTA acquisition influences this relationship.

Materials and Methods

Study Participants

We used data from MR CLEAN1 for this post hoc analysis. MR CLEAN (ran between December 2010 and March 2014) was a randomized clinical trial of EVT plus standard care (intervention group) versus standard care alone (control group) in patients with a proximal arterial anterior circulation occlusion demonstrated on CTA and treatable within 6 hours after symptom onset. Patient eligibility has been described previously.14 The MR CLEAN trial protocol was approved by the Medical and Ethical Review Committee (Medisch Ethische Toetsings Commissie of the Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands) and the research board of each participating center. All patient data were anonymized before analysis, and all patients or their legal representatives provided written informed consent.

For the present study, we selected patients who received thin-slice CTA imaging with a maximum of 2.5-mm slice thickness who had a proved occlusion of the internal carotid artery, carotid bifurcation (ICA-T), or M1 or M2 segment of the MCA. Patients with extreme artifacts or insufficient scan quality were excluded.

Outcomes

The primary clinical outcome was the degree of disability scored at 90 days on the mRS, a 7-point scale ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 6 (death).15 Secondary clinical outcome was functional independence at 90 days, defined as mRS 0–2.

Primary radiologic outcome was follow-up infarct volume (FIV) assessed on noncontrast CT at 1 week (range, 3–9 days). If follow-up noncontrast CT was not available at 1 week due to death or discharge, noncontrast CT at 24 hours (range, 12–48 hours) was used to assess FIV. Secondary radiologic outcome was FIV dichotomized into small and large infarcts, with a cutoff value of 90 mL.

Quantitative Assessment of Collateral Capacity

We used a previously presented method to quantify the collateral capacity in an automated fashion.13 Briefly, this method consisted of estimation of the potential tissue-at-risk, segmentation of the arterial vasculature, and comparison of the hemispheres. First, a probability map16 was used to estimate the extent of the potential tissue-at-risk on the basis of the level of occlusions in our dataset (ICA, ICA-T, M1, and M2). In this process, coregistration of the probability map with each patient's CTA was performed using Elastix (v.4.8; http://elastix.isi.uu.nl) to correct shape, orientation, and size. The potential tissue-at-risk was estimated by the region that had >5% chance of being infarcted at follow-up, given the level of occlusion. This region was mirrored to the contralateral hemisphere to serve as a reference. Second, the vasculature within these regions was segmented using a multiscale approach that enforces segmentation of solely the smaller arterial vasculature (eg, exclusion of the circle of Willis). Thus, mean vessel diameters (ranging from 0.9 to 3.1 mm) served as the target range. These diameters were based on a detailed statistical cerebroarterial atlas derived from 700 MR angiography images.17 The sum of the multiplication of the segmented vasculature volume with its voxel-based density values represented the vascular appearance in each hemisphere. The quantitative collateral score (qCS) was calculated as the ratio of vascular appearance between hemispheres, via the following equation: Embedded Image where VAipsilateral and VAcontralateral are the vascular appearance of the affected and contralateral sides, respectively. qCS is expressed in percentages.

Visual Assessment of Collateral Capacity

The imaging committee of MR CLEAN assessed the visual collateral score (vCS) using the method of Tan et al.18 All observers had >10 years of experience and were blinded to all clinical findings except the symptom side. Two neuroradiologists independently graded all CTA images. A third reader resolved any discrepancies. In the 4-point vCS scale, a score of zero indicated absent collaterals (0% filling of the occluded territory), 1 indicated poor collaterals (>0% and ≤50% filling of the occluded territory), 2 indicated moderate collaterals (>50% and <100% filling of the occluded territory), and 3 indicated good collaterals (100% filling of the occluded territory).18 A mixture of the CTA source images and maximum-intensity-projections was used for visual assessment. If different slices expressed different filling, an average collateral score over all available slices was determined. Agreement beyond chance with a κ of 0.60 has previously been reported in MR CLEAN.9 An example of qCS scoring is shown in Fig 1.

Fig 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 1.

An example of quantitative collateral capacity scoring. A, An axial plane of a baseline CTA image acquired in the peak venous phase with a right-sided M1 segment occlusion of the MCA territory. B, Segmentation results of automated quantitative collateral assessment of the ipsilateral (red) and contralateral (blue) hemispheres. The quantitative collateral score was 46%. C, 3D representation of the segmented vasculature.

Follow-Up Infarct Volume

Follow-up infarct volume was assessed on follow-up noncontrast CT. In case of hemicraniectomy, the last scan before the operation was selected. Ischemic lesions were segmented using validated software, resulting in a binary mask of the FIV.19 Adjacent hyperdense areas suspicious for hemorrhagic transformation were considered part of the FIV. All FIVs were inspected and adjusted if necessary by a trained observer (A.M.M.B.) with >4 years of experience and at least 1 neuroradiologist (W.H.v.Z., L.F.M.B., or C.B.L.M.M.) with >15 years of experience. A consensus reading with 2 neuroradiologists was performed to resolve any discrepancies. The FIV was calculated in milliliters by multiplying the number of voxels of the segmented ischemic lesion by its voxel size.

Assessment of CTA Image-Acquisition Phase

The scoring method introduced by Rodriguez-Luna et al20 was used to assess phases of the CTA image acquisition. A trained observer (A.M.M.B.) measured the contrast density in Hounsfield units in the unaffected hemisphere of the M1 segment of the MCA territory (arterial structure) and the confluence of sinuses (venous structure). On the basis of these contrast measurements, all CTA studies were classified into 1 of the 5 acquisition phases: “early arterial,” “peak arterial,” “equilibrium,” “peak venous,” or “late venous.” Phases were further dichotomized into “early arterial” and “arteriovenous” (peak arterial through late venous phase).

Statistical Analysis

Dichotomous variables were presented as a proportion of the population. Continuous variables were presented as mean and SD if normally distributed or as median and interquartile range (IQR) otherwise.

Relationship of the Quantitative Collateral Score with the Reference Score

The vCS was used as a reference standard to evaluate the quantitative scoring method qCS. One-way ANOVA was performed to test for differences in qCS values among vCS groups. The Spearman rank correlation coefficient was calculated to determine the relationship of qCS with vCS.

Relationship of Collateral Capacity Scores with Outcome

Spearman rank correlation coefficients with 95% CIs were calculated for both scoring methods to determine the relation with clinical and radiologic outcome measures. The effect of the collateral scores on outcome was estimated with univariate and multivariable modeling. The effect on the primary clinical outcome (mRS) was calculated using ordinal logistic regression and reported as adjusted and unadjusted ORs with 95% CIs. The effect of collateral scores on FIV was analyzed with linear regression and reported as adjusted and unadjusted βs with 95% CIs. FIV was log-transformed to best satisfy the linear model (normal distribution of residuals and homoscedasticity). The exponent of β determines the relative difference in FIV per 1-point increase in the collateral score. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to assess the association with dichotomized outcomes. Areas under the curve were tested for differences using the approach of DeLong et al.21 Multivariable modeling included prespecified prognostic variables: EVT allocated; age; stroke severity measured on the NIHSS score at baseline; time of stroke symptom onset to randomization; the presence of previous stroke, atrial fibrillation, or diabetes mellitus; and occlusion site (ICA-T versus not).

Treatment Effect Modification by Collateral Capacity Scores

We used multiplicative interaction terms to test for modification of treatment effect on clinical and imaging outcomes by collateral capacity, as measured with qCS and vCS.

Influence of Phase of CTA Image Acquisition

To study the influence of CTA acquisition phase, we used modeling with multiplicative interaction terms to test for modification of the effect of collateral capacity on outcomes by acquisition phase. The relation of the collateral measures to outcome was determined via the Spearman correlation for each individual acquisition phase, as well as for the dichotomized phases.

A 2-sided P value <.05 was considered significant for all tests. All statistical analyses were performed in SPSS, Version 24.0 (IBM, Armonk, New York).

Results

From the 500 patients in MR CLEAN, 58 subjects were excluded from the present study for the following reasons: Thirty-two did not have available thin-slice CTA images, 14 had incomplete head scans, 8 scans showed insufficient quality (extreme noise, n = 5; extreme motion artifacts, n = 3), 3 had an occlusion in the anterior cerebral artery, and 1 patient was excluded because of a coregistration error. Thus, 442 patients met the study-specific inclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1:

Baseline characteristics

The mean age was 64.8 ± 13.8 years, 207 (46.8%) were allocated to EVT, the median FIV was 87 mL (IQR, 32–190), and the median mRS at 90 days was 4 (IQR, 2–5), with 111 (25.1%) achieving functional independence (mRS 0–2).

Relation with Reference Score

Figure 2 illustrates 4 case examples of CTA images with corresponding vCSs and qCSs. The distribution of the qCS per vCS is shown in Fig 3. The qCS was significantly different among all vCS groups (P < .05), except for absent collaterals versus poor collaterals (P = .46). The correlation between qCS and vCS was strong and statistically significant with a Spearman ρ of 0.75 (P < .001).

Fig 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 2.

Case examples of 4 patients with different visually scored collateral grades and corresponding quantitative collateral scores. Each panel shows a maximum-intensity-projection of the CTA image (left) and the segmented vasculature for qCS calculation (right). The automated segmentation on the ipsilateral side is shown in blue and the segmentation on the contralateral side is shown in red. A, Absent collaterals (visual collateral score = 0). CTA of an 83-year-old man with a left-sided M2 occlusion acquired in the early arterial phase. Follow-up infarct volume was 205 mL, and the mRS score was 6. B, Poor collaterals (vCS = 1). CTA of a 79-year-old man with a right-sided M1 occlusion acquired in the equilibrium phase. FIV was 245 mL, and the mRS score was 6. C, Moderate collaterals (vCS = 2). CTA of a 45-year-old woman with a left-sided M1 occlusion acquired in the peak arterial phase. FIV was 24 mL, and the mRS score was 2. D, Good collaterals (vCS = 3). CTA of a 76-year-old woman with a left-sided ICA-T occlusion acquired in the late venous phase. FIV was 48 mL, and the mRS score was 3.

Fig 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 3.

Distribution of quantitative collateral scores per visual collateral score, ranging from absent collaterals (0% filling of the occluded territory) to good collaterals (100% filling of the occluded territory). The quantitative collateral score was significantly different among all visual collateral score groups, except for absent collaterals (grade 0) versus poor collaterals (grade 1).

Relation with Outcome

Both vCS and qCS showed significant correlations with mRS (both P < .001) and FIV (both P < .001) (Table 2). The relation of vCS with mRS and FIV was weaker (mRS: ρ = −.31; FIV: ρ = −.44) compared with qCS (mRS: ρ = −.40; FIV: ρ = −.46), but this difference was not statistically significant. Adjusted for the prespecified prognostic variables, the OR for an increase in mRS was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.77–0.86; P < .001) per 10% increase in qCS. Linear regression analysis showed that an increase of 10% in qCS led to a relative decrease in FIV of 13% (exponent of β = 0.87, P < .001) in the adjusted analysis. Results of the all regression analyses for the effect of collateral scores on outcome are shown in Tables 3 and 4.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2:

Spearman rank ρ (95% CI) of collateral measures with outcomes for all studies and per CTA acquisition phase

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3:

Results of adjusted and unadjusted regression analyses for the effect of collateral capacity on follow-up infarct volume

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4:

Results of adjusted and unadjusted regression analyses for the effect of collateral capacity on modified Rankin Scale

Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed areas under the curve of, respectively, 0.68 and 0.65 for qCS and vCS for discrimination between favorable and unfavorable functional outcomes (Fig 4A). This difference was not significant (P = .21). When we assessed the power to distinguish small from large infarcts, qCS showed an area under the curve of 0.71, compared with an area under the curve of 0.69 for the vCS measure (P = .23) (Fig 4B).

Fig 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 4.

Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of visual and quantitative collateral scores for discriminating favorable outcome (mRS 0–2) with areas under the curve of, respectively, 0.65 and 0.68 (A) and large infarct (FIV of >90 mL) with areas under the curve of, respectively, 0.69 and 0.71 (B).

Association with Treatment Effect

Results of the interaction analysis for the qCS and vCS measures are shown in Table 5. A significant interaction of qCS and the EVT effect was found in the unadjusted analysis on the full ordinal mRS scale (P = .048) and on favorable outcome (mRS 0–2) with a P value of .049. This effect was absent after adjustment for predefined baseline variables. No significant modification of treatment effect by vCS was found in this substudy of MR CLEAN.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 5:

P values of interaction analysis for primary and secondary outcome measures

Influence of Phase on CTA Image Acquisition

Baseline CTA was acquired in the early arterial phase in 20.6% (n = 91), peak arterial phase in 12.7% (n = 56), equilibrium phase in 27.8% (n = 123), early venous phase in 25.8% (n = 114), and late venous phase in 13.1% (n = 58). Bar graphs (Fig 5) depict the distribution of qCS within the early arterial and arteriovenous phases and the number of patients reaching functional independence.

Fig 5.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 5.

Bar graphs depict the proportion of functional independence (mRS 0–2) by quantitative collateral score strata for CTA image acquisition in the early arterial phase (A) and arteriovenous phase (B), and by visual collateral scores in the early arterial phase (C) and arteriovenous phase (D).

A significant modification of the effect of qCS on clinical and imaging outcomes (mRS at day 90 and FIV) by acquisition phase was found in unadjusted (both P < .001) and adjusted analysis (mRS: P = .004; FIV: P < .001). The strength of the relationship between collateral capacity and outcome was greater in the arteriovenous phase. This effect modification was absent with vCS as a determinant of mRS (unadjusted P = .50, adjusted P = .89) and FIV (unadjusted P = .19, adjusted P = .32), respectively.

Spearman correlation coefficients for collateral measures with imaging and clinical outcomes per CTA image acquisition phase are shown in Table 2. A significant correlation of qCS with both mRS and FIV was observed among all phases, as well as for vCS with FIV. Correlation of vCS with mRS measured in the early arterial and peak arterial phases did not reach statistical significance (respectively P = .052 and P = .11). Overall, correlations of both qCS and vCS with outcome were weaker in the early arterial phase (n = 91, 20.6%) than in the arteriovenous phase (n = 331, 79.4%).

Discussion

In this post hoc analysis of MR CLEAN, we found that collateral capacity estimated on baseline CTA quantitatively correlates well with current visual assessment. We provide evidence that quantitative assessment of collateral capacity is a strong independent predictor of outcome. Overall, patients with a low qCS are associated with larger FIVs on follow-up imaging and worse functional outcomes. We showed that acquiring an image in an early stage after contrast bolus was common in MR CLEAN. We demonstrated that the timing of the CTA acquisition modifies the effect of quantitative collateral assessment on outcome in such a way that early arterial acquisitions are inferior to arteriovenous acquisitions.

Despite the growing body of research on collateral circulation and the evidence that it could guide treatment decisions, only a few studies have addressed the use of automated quantitative analysis to assess the collateral capacity. The promise of extracting quantitative imaging parameters enables producing observer-independent and consistent results and may aid physicians in discriminating those who may do poorly with EVT. This could be especially helpful for physicians in local hospitals who seldom deal with patients with acute stroke and therefore lack experience in grading collateral capacity. Moreover, a reliable quantitative measure augments the ability of clinical research to fully explore the role of collateral circulation in evaluating and understanding stroke pathophysiology.

Our study is not the first to use quantitative analysis for estimation of collateral capacity. Ernst et al22 proposed an atlas-based method for automated quantification of the collateral abundance on time-of-flight and contrast-enhanced MRA imaging and found, in concordance with our study, that poorly visible collaterals identify patients with poor outcome. However, we found no other study that examined the clinical value of quantitatively assessed collateral capacity on CTA. Even though CTA (single-phase in particular) is limited in its ability to evaluate the cerebral circulation, it is the most widely used imaging technique in acute stroke. Thus, our study shows the benefit of quantitating collaterals in the current acute workflow that involves rapid triage of patients with stroke.

We observed a substantial effect of the collateral capacity assessed on CTA on a patient's functional outcome, in line with previous studies. For example, a qCS of 30% would increase the odds of a better functional outcome (ie, decreasing 1 point on the mRS scale) with 57%, compared with a qCS of 0%. Also, that we found a significant modification of treatment effect by collaterals highlights the importance of collateral grading on baseline imaging, confirming the statement of the Acute Stroke Imaging Research Roadmap III on the role of imaging selection on outcomes in acute stroke reperfusion clinical trials.12

A modification of the EVT effect by visually scored collaterals was absent in this substudy, which contrasts with the findings in a previous study of the entire MR CLEAN population.9 This discrepancy is most likely due to the difference in study populations.

We found that with early acquisitions after contrast administration, patients with poor collaterals did unexpectedly well, whereas not a single patient with a qCS of <15% reached functional independence in the arteriovenous phase. This finding illustrates the downside of conventional single-phase CTA, in which the risk of underestimation is considerable because of the lack of temporal information.23⇓–25 Our data confirm that the strength of the relation between collateral capacity and outcome increases with the acquisition phase. We did not find an effect modification of visually graded collaterals by CTA acquisition phase. This can possibly be explained by the low number of patients in the lower grades. A substantial number of patients in our study having untimely CTA acquisitions raises concern, especially when using collateral capacity as a selection tool for EVT. Our study emphasizes that one should be aware of the limitations of single-phase CTA in evaluating a patient's collateral capacity. In future work, our method could benefit from an automated CTA acquisition phase measurement to easily gain knowledge on optimal or suboptimal timing as a measure of reliability. This could be realized by expanding the cerebroarterial atlas with venous structures and ROIs as proposed by Rodriguez-Luna et al.20

We can only speculate that due to newer CT scanners and the increasing awareness of physicians of the role of collaterals in acute stroke, the timing of image acquisition in general may improve. Upcoming techniques such as multiphase CTA and dynamic CTA overcome this problem by sequential imaging at the same level in the brain. Multiphase or dynamic CTA is better at prognostication of clinical outcomes than single-phase CTA.26⇓–28 Moreover, dynamic CTA has proved superior in predicting the FIV.27 Our method of quantitatively scoring the collateral capacity can easily be extended to these imaging techniques. This transition could be achieved by applying our method to each individual sequence after correcting for head movement via coregistration. Subsequently, the values within each voxel could be condensed to a single value such as the average or maximum. Also, measuring the time-to-peak within the voxels would allow showing the speed of contrast filling within the arteries (contrary to the contralateral side), which might aid the physician in recognizing the tissue-at-risk. Additional research is warranted to further elucidate the role of quantitative collateral scoring within these techniques.

Our study has some limitations. We excluded some patients with thick-slice CTAs compared with thin slices; the former results in suboptimal vessel segmentation, a key requirement in quantitative collateral scoring. In addition, we did not exclude patients who had a proximal stenosis. Such patients could have had delayed filling due to the flow-limiting stenosis. In MR CLEAN, 57 patients were scored as having cervical internal carotid artery stenosis.29 This might have affected the interpretation of the collateral capacity. Furthermore, we did not evaluate the relation of qCS with collateral scores as assessed on multivessel DSA, the criterion standard for collateral assessment, on the grounds that sample sizes were too small to consider DSA a reference standard: Of all patients in MR CLEAN having both CTA and DSA of sufficient quality to evaluate complete collateral circulation, imaging data of a mere 45 patients could be used for evaluation.30 Moreover, Jansen et al30 have shown that the agreement between CTA- and DSA-based visual collateral assessment is low. The relation of qCS with DSA-based collateral scores is therefore also expected to be weak.

With the recent pooling of multiple randomized controlled trials,31 larger datasets may become available to investigate how qCS fared against DSA. Moreover, the computation time required for image postprocessing of 6–10 minutes on a modern PC is rather high. Future work must focus on reducing this computation time before this approach could be applied in clinical practice where speed is of the essence. In addition, the quantitative method makes use of a cerebroarterial atlas derived from healthy subjects. Even though data of 700 subjects was used to create this atlas, it is possible that the vascular anatomy of a patient with acute stroke deviates from that in these healthy subjects, leading to over- and underestimation of the presence of arteries distal to the clot. Adding a component that identifies clot location (manually or automated) will likely increase the accuracy.

Conclusions

We provide evidence that quantitative collateral scoring is a reliable measure of the collateral capacity on baseline CTA in patients with acute stroke. Our results show that qCS could help clinicians make EVT treatment decisions and predict clinical and imaging outcomes. Furthermore, qCS can be standardized relatively easily compared with current subjective measures of collateral assessment in patients presenting with acute ischemic stroke.

Footnotes

  • Disclosures: Anna M.M. Boers—UNRELATED: Stock/Stock Options: Nico-lab BV. O.A. Berkhemer—UNRELATED: Consultancy: Stryker*. Bijoy K. Menon—OTHER RELATIONSHIPS: patent pending for systems of triage in acute stroke. Diederik W.J. Dippel—UNRELATED: Grants/Grants Pending: Dutch Heart Foundation, Dutch Brain Foundation, Angiocare BV, Medtronic/Covidien/ev3, MEDAC GmbH/Lamepro, Penumbra, Stryker, Topic Medical/Concentric*. Aad van der Lugt—UNRELATED: Consultancy: Stryker*; Grants/Grants Pending: Dutch Heart Foundation, Dutch Brain Foundation, Stryker, Penumbra*. Wim H. van Zwam—UNRELATED: Payment for Lectures Including Service on Speakers Bureaus: Cerenovus, Stryker*. Charles B.L.M. Majoie—UNRELATED: Grants/Grants Pending: Dutch Heart Foundation, European Commission, TWIN Foundation, Stryker*. Henk A. Marquering—OTHER RELATIONSHIPS: cofounder and shareholder of Nico-lab BV. *Money paid to the institution.

  • This study was supported by a grant from the Stichting Toegepast Wetenschappelijk Instituut voor Neuromodulatie (TWIN). The MR CLEAN trial was funded by the Dutch Heart Foundation and through unrestricted grants from Angiocare BV, Covidien/ev3, MEDAC GmbH/Lamepro, and Penumbra.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Berkhemer OA,
    2. Fransen PS,
    3. Beumer D, et al
    . A randomized trial of intraarterial treatment for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2015;372:11–20 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1411587 pmid:25517348
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Campbell BC,
    2. Mitchell PJ,
    3. Kleinig TJ, et al
    ; EXTEND-IA Investigators. Endovascular therapy for ischemic stroke with perfusion-imaging selection. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1009–18 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1414792 pmid:25671797
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Saver JL,
    2. Goyal M,
    3. Bonafe A, et al
    ; SWIFT PRIME Investigators. Stent-retriever thrombectomy after intravenous t-PA vs. t-PA alone in stroke. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2285–95 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1415061 pmid:25882376
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Goyal M,
    2. Demchuk AM,
    3. Menon BK, et al
    ; ESCAPE Trial Investigators. Randomized assessment of rapid endovascular treatment of ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1019–30 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1414905 pmid:25671798
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Jovin TG,
    2. Chamorro A,
    3. Cobo E, et al
    ; REVASCAT Trial Investigators. Thrombectomy within 8 hours after symptom onset in ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2296–306 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1503780 pmid:25882510
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Nogueira RG,
    2. Jadhav AP,
    3. Haussen DC, et al
    ; DAWN Trial Investigators. Thrombectomy 6 to 24 hours after stroke with a mismatch between deficit and infarct. N Engl J Med 2018;378:11–21 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1706442 pmid:29129157
    CrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Christoforidis GA,
    2. Mohammad Y,
    3. Kehagias D, et al
    . Angiographic assessment of pial collaterals as a prognostic indicator following intra-arterial thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:1789–97 pmid:16091531
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Menon BK,
    2. Smith EE,
    3. Modi J, et al
    . Regional leptomeningeal score on CT angiography predicts clinical and imaging outcomes in patients with acute anterior circulation occlusions. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:1640–45 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2564 pmid:21799045
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Berkhemer OA,
    2. Jansen IG,
    3. Beumer D, et al
    ; MR CLEAN Investigators. Collateral status on baseline computed tomographic angiography and intra-arterial treatment effect in patients with proximal anterior circulation stroke. Stroke 2016;47:768–76 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.011788 pmid:26903582
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Liebeskind DS,
    2. Tomsick TA,
    3. Foster LD, et al
    ; IMS III Investigators. Collaterals at angiography and outcomes in the Interventional Management of Stroke (IMS) III trial. Stroke 2014;45:759–64 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.004072 pmid:24473178
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. McVerry F,
    2. Liebeskind DS,
    3. Muir KW
    . Systematic review of methods for assessing leptomeningeal collateral flow. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:576–82 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2794 pmid:22135128
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Warach SJ,
    2. Luby M,
    3. Albers GW, et al
    ; Stroke Imaging Research (STIR) and VISTA-Imaging Investigators. Acute stroke imaging research roadmap III imaging selection and outcomes in acute stroke reperfusion clinical trials: consensus recommendations and further research priorities. Stroke 2016;47:1389–98 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.012364 pmid:27073243
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Cardoso MJ,
    2. Arbel T,
    3. Gao F, et al.
    1. Boers AM,
    2. Sales Barros R,
    3. Jansen IG, et al
    . Quantitative collateral grading on CT angiography in patients with acute ischemic stroke. In: Cardoso MJ, Arbel T, Gao F, et al., eds. Molecular Imaging, Reconstruction and Analysis of Moving Body Organs, and Stroke Imaging and Treatment. Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop, CMMI 2017, Second International Workshop, RAMBO 2017, and First International Workshop, SWITCH 2017, Held in Conjunction with MICCAI 2017, Québec City, Quebec, Canada. September 14, 2017. New York: Springer-Verlag International Publishing; 2017:176–84
  14. 14.↵
    1. Fransen PS,
    2. Beumer D,
    3. Berkhemer OA, et al
    ; MR CLEAN Investigators. MR CLEAN, a Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2014;15:343 doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-343 pmid:25179366
    CrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Saver JL
    . Novel end point analytic techniques and interpreting shifts across the entire range of outcome scales in acute stroke trials. Stroke 2007;38:3055–62 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.488536 pmid:17916765
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Boers AM,
    2. Berkhemer OA,
    3. Slump CH, et al
    ; MR CLEAN trial investigators. Topographic distribution of cerebral infarct probability in patients with acute ischemic stroke: mapping of intra-arterial treatment effect. J Neurointerv Surg 2017;9:431–36 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012387 pmid:27112775
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    1. Forkert ND,
    2. Fiehler J,
    3. Suniaga S, et al
    . A statistical cerebroarterial atlas derived from 700 MRA datasets. Methods Inf Med 2013;52:467–74 doi:10.3414/ME13-02-0001 pmid:24190179
    CrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Tan IY,
    2. Demchuk AM,
    3. Hopyan J, et al
    . CT angiography clot burden score and collateral score: correlation with clinical and radiologic outcomes in acute middle cerebral artery infarct. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:525–31 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1408 pmid:19147716
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  19. 19.↵
    1. Boers AM,
    2. Marquering HA,
    3. Jochem JJ, et al
    ; MR CLEAN investigators. Automated cerebral infarct volume measurement in follow-up noncontrast CT scans of patients with acute ischemic stroke. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:1522–27 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3463 pmid:23471018
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. Rodriguez-Luna D,
    2. Dowlatshahi D,
    3. Aviv RI, et al
    ; PREDICT/Sunnybrook ICH CTA Study Group. Venous phase of computed tomography angiography increases spot sign detection, but intracerebral hemorrhage expansion is greater in spot signs detected in arterial phase. Stroke 2014;45:734–39 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.003007 pmid:24481974
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    1. DeLong ER,
    2. DeLong DM,
    3. Clarke-Pearson DL
    . Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988;44:837–45 doi:10.2307/2531595 pmid:3203132
    CrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Ernst M,
    2. Forkert ND,
    3. Brehmer L, et al
    . Prediction of infarction and reperfusion in stroke by flow- and volume-weighted collateral signal in MR angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:275–82 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4145 pmid:25500313
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    1. Nambiar V,
    2. Sohn SI,
    3. Almekhlafi MA, et al
    . CTA collateral status and response to recanalization in patients with acute ischemic stroke. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:884–90 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3817 pmid:24371030
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Casault C,
    2. Al Sultan AS,
    3. Trivedi A, et al
    . Collateral scoring on CT angiogram must evaluate phase and regional pattern. Can J Neurol Sci 2017;44:503–07 doi:10.1017/cjn.2017.53 pmid:28862107
    CrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Frölich AM,
    2. Wolff SL,
    3. Psychogios MN, et al
    . Time-resolved assessment of collateral flow using 4D CT angiography in large-vessel occlusion stroke. Eur Radiol 2014;24:390–96 doi:10.1007/s00330-013-3024-6 pmid:24078013
    CrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Menon BK,
    2. d'Esterre CD,
    3. Qazi EM, et al
    . Multiphase CT angiography: a new tool for the imaging triage of patients with acute ischemic stroke. Radiology 2015;275:510–20 doi:10.1148/radiol.15142256 pmid:25633505
    CrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Beyer SE,
    2. Thierfelder KM,
    3. von Baumgarten L, et al
    . Strategies of collateral blood flow assessment in ischemic stroke: prediction of the follow-up infarct volume in conventional and dynamic CTA. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:488–94 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4131 pmid:25523589
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  28. 28.↵
    1. van den Wijngaard IR,
    2. Holswilder G,
    3. Wermer MJH, et al
    . Assessment of collateral status by dynamic CT angiography in acute MCA stroke: timing of acquisition and relationship with final infarct volume. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:1231–36 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4746 pmid:27032971
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    1. Berkhemer OA,
    2. Borst J,
    3. Kappelhof M, et al
    ; MR CLEAN Investigators. Extracranial carotid disease and effect of intra-arterial treatment in patients with proximal anterior circulation stroke in MR CLEAN. Ann Intern Med 2017;166:867–75 doi:10.7326/M16-1536 pmid:28531910
    CrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Jansen IG,
    2. Berkhemer OA,
    3. Yoo AJ, et al
    . Comparison of CTA- and DSA-based collateral flow assessment in patients with anterior circulation stroke. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:2037–42 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4878 pmid:27418474
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  31. 31.↵
    1. Goyal M,
    2. Menon BK,
    3. van Zwam WH, et al
    ; HERMES collaborators. Endovascular thrombectomy after large-vessel ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from five randomised trials. Lancet 2016;387:1723–31 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00163-X pmid:26898852
    CrossRefPubMed
  • Received December 1, 2017.
  • Accepted after revision February 9, 2018.
  • © 2018 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
Next
Back to top
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Value of Quantitative Collateral Scoring on CT Angiography in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
A.M.M. Boers, R. Sales Barros, I.G.H. Jansen, O.A. Berkhemer, L.F.M. Beenen, B.K. Menon, D.W.J. Dippel, A. van der Lugt, W.H. van Zwam, Y.B.W.E.M. Roos, R.J. van Oostenbrugge, C.H. Slump, C.B.L.M. Majoie, H.A. Marquering
Value of Quantitative Collateral Scoring on CT Angiography in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke
American Journal of Neuroradiology Apr 2018, DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5623

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Value of Quantitative Collateral Scoring on CT Angiography in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke
A.M.M. Boers, R. Sales Barros, I.G.H. Jansen, O.A. Berkhemer, L.F.M. Beenen, B.K. Menon, D.W.J. Dippel, A. van der Lugt, W.H. van Zwam, Y.B.W.E.M. Roos, R.J. van Oostenbrugge, C.H. Slump, C.B.L.M. Majoie, H.A. Marquering
American Journal of Neuroradiology Apr 2018, DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5623
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ABBREVIATIONS:
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Arterial collateral status and treatment effect of intravenous alteplase thrombolysis prior to endovascular treatment in patients with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion: prespecified analysis of the MR CLEAN-NO IV trial
  • Time Since Stroke Onset, Quantitative Collateral Score, and Functional Outcome After Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke
  • MRI-based computational model generation for cerebral perfusion simulations in health and ischaemic stroke
  • On the sensitivity analysis of porous finite element models for cerebral perfusion estimation
  • Crossref
  • Google Scholar

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

More in this TOC Section

Neurointervention

  • A Retrospective Study in Tentorial DAVFs
  • Proximal Protection Devices for Carotid Stenting
  • Rescue Reentry in Carotid Near-Occlusion
Show more Neurointervention

Adult Brain

  • Diagnostic Neuroradiology of Monoclonal Antibodies
  • Clinical Outcomes After Chiari I Decompression
  • Segmentation of Brain Metastases with BLAST
Show more Adult Brain

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editor's Choice
  • Fellows' Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Video Articles

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

More from AJNR

  • Trainee Corner
  • Imaging Protocols
  • MRI Safety Corner
  • Book Reviews

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcasts
  • AJNR Scantastics

Resources

  • Turnaround Time
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Submit a Video Article
  • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Statistical Tips
  • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Author Policies
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • News and Updates

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Board Alumni
  • Alerts
  • Permissions
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Advertise with Us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Feedback
  • Terms and Conditions
  • AJNR Editorial Board Alumni

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire