切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华介入放射学电子杂志 ›› 2024, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (04) : 338 -343. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5782.2024.04.009

神经介入

血栓负荷评分对支架取栓治疗急性前循环大血管闭塞首过效应的预测价值
何中海1, 贾振宇2,(), 刘圣2   
  1. 1.239200 安徽滁州,安徽省来安家宁医院神经内科
    2.210000 江苏南京,南京医科大学第一附属医院介入放射科
  • 收稿日期:2024-05-24 出版日期:2024-11-25
  • 通信作者: 贾振宇

Predictive value of clot burden score for first pass effect of stent retrieve thrombectomy for acute anterior circulation large vessel occlusion

Zhonghai He1, Zhenyu Jia2,(), Sheng Liu2   

  1. 1.Department of Neurology, Lai'an Jia Ning Hospital, Anhui Chuzhou 239200
    2.Department of Interventional Radiology, First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Jiangsu Nanjing 210029, China
  • Received:2024-05-24 Published:2024-11-25
  • Corresponding author: Zhenyu Jia
引用本文:

何中海, 贾振宇, 刘圣. 血栓负荷评分对支架取栓治疗急性前循环大血管闭塞首过效应的预测价值[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 338-343.

Zhonghai He, Zhenyu Jia, Sheng Liu. Predictive value of clot burden score for first pass effect of stent retrieve thrombectomy for acute anterior circulation large vessel occlusion[J]. Chinese Journal of Interventional Radiology(Electronic Edition), 2024, 12(04): 338-343.

目的

探讨基于术前计算机断层血管造影的血栓负荷评分对支架取栓治疗急性前循环大血管闭塞首过效应(first pass effect,FPE)的预测价值。

方法

回顾性纳入2021年1月至2023年12月南京医科大学第一附属医院因前循环大血管急性闭塞接受支架取栓治疗的395例急性缺血性脑卒中患者的临床资料。依据术中造影结果,分为FPE组(114例)和无FPE组(281例)。采用单因素及多因素Logistic回归分析以确定FPE的预测因素。运用受试者工作特征(receiver operating characteristic,ROC)曲线评价血栓负荷评分对FPE的预测能力。

结果

多因素Logistic回归分析显示血栓负荷评分(OR:2.454,95%CI:1.753~3.429;P<0.001)是FPE的独立预测因素。基于ROC曲线,血栓负荷评分预测FPE的ROC曲线下面积为0.820。预测FPE的最佳截断值为6分,当血栓负荷评分≥6分时,预测FPE的灵敏性为87.3%,特异性为76.9%,阳性预测值为79.1%,阴性预测值为91.4%。

结论

血栓负荷评分对支架取栓治疗急性前循环大血管闭塞FPE具有一定的预测价值,可以作为取栓FPE的早期独立预测因子。

Objective

To investigate the predictive value of preoperative CTA-based clot burden score for the first pass effect (FPE) of stent retrieve thrombectomy for acute anterior circulation large vessel occlusion.

Methods

The clinical data of 395 consecutive acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients treated with first-line stent retrieve thrombectomy for large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from January 2021 to December 2023 were retrospectively included. Patients were divided into the FPE group (114 cases) and the non-FPE group (281 cases) according to angiography after the first thrombectomy attempt. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify predictors of FPE. The overall discriminative ability of clot burden score in predicting FPE was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Results

After adjustment for potential confounders, clot burden score (OR: 2.454, 95%CI: 1.753~3.429, P<0.001) remained as an independent predictor for FPE. Based on the ROC, the clot burden score as a predictor for predicting FPE had an area under the curve of 0.820. The optimized cut-off of the clot burden score for predicting FPE was 6. When the score was ≥ 6, the sensitivity for predicting FPE was 87.3%, the specificity was 76.9%, the positive predictive value was 79.1%, and the negative predictive value was 91.4%.

Conclusion

The clot burden score had predictive value for FPE of stent retrieve thrombectomy for acute anterior circulation large vessel occlusion and may be used as an early independent predictor of FPE.

表1 2组患者的基线资料比较
表2 预测FPE的单因素及多因素Logistic回归分析
图1 ROC曲线评估血栓负荷评分对FPE的预测能力
图2 ROC曲线评估血栓负荷评分联合大脑中动脉闭塞及大动脉粥样硬化对支架取栓FPE的预测能力
[1]
中华医学会神经病学分会, 中华医学会神经病学分会脑血管病学组. 中国急性缺血性脑卒中诊治指南2018[J]. 中华神经科杂志, 2018, 51(9): 666-682.
[2]
Zaidat OO, Castonguay AC, Linfante I, et al. First pass effect: a new measure for stroke thrombectomy devices[J]. Stroke, 2018,49(3): 660-666.
[3]
Di Maria F, Kyheng M, Consoli A, et al. Identifying the predictors of first-pass effect and its influence on clinical outcome in the setting of endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke:results from a multicentric prospective registry[J]. Int J Stroke,2021, 16(1): 20-28.
[4]
陈正文, 李沛城, 刘一之, 等. 机械取栓治疗大血管闭塞性急性缺血性脑卒中首过效应预测因素[J]. 中国介入影像与治疗学,2022, 19(6): 338-342.
[5]
Hofmeister J, Bernava G, Rosi A, et al. Clot-based radiomics predict a mechanical thrombectomy strategy for successful recanalization in acute ischemic stroke[J]. Stroke, 2020, 51(8):2488-2494.
[6]
He G, Deng J, Lu H, et al. Thrombus enhancement sign on CT angiography is associated with the first pass effect of stent retrievers[J]. J Neurointerv Surg, 2023, 15(2): 146-152.
[7]
Li G, Wu G, Qin Z, et al. Prognostic value of clot burden score in acute ischemic stroke after reperfusion therapies: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis, 2019,28(10): 104293.
[8]
Derraz I, Bourcier R, Soudant M, et al. Does clot burden score on baseline t2*-mri impact clinical outcome in acute ischemic stroke treated with mechanical thrombectomy?[J]. J Stroke, 2019, 21(1):91-100.
[9]
中华医学会神经病学分会, 中华医学会神经病学分会脑血管病学组, 中华医学会神经病学分会神经血管介入协作组. 中国急性缺血性脑卒中早期血管内介入诊疗指南2018[J]. 中华神经科杂志, 2018, 51(9): 683-691.
[10]
Puetz V, Dzialowski I, Hill MD, et al. Intracranial thrombus extent predicts clinical outcome, final infarct size and hemorrhagic transformation in ischemic stroke: the clot burden score[J]. Int J Stroke, 2008, 3(4): 230-236.
[11]
Lecouffe NE, Kapppelhof M, Treurniet KM, et al. 2B, 2C, or 3:What should be the angiographic target for endovascular treatment in ischemic stroke? [J]. Stroke, 2020, 51(6): 1790-1796.
[12]
Kummer RV, Broderick JP, Campbell BC, et al. The heidelberg bleeding classification: classification of bleeding events after ischemic stroke and reperfusion therapy[J]. Stroke, 2015, 46(10):2981-2986.
[13]
Liu XF, Xu GL, Liu YX, et al. Acute basilar artery occlusion:endovascular interventions versus standard medical treatment(BEST) trial-design and protocol for a randomized, controlled,multicenter study[J]. Int J Stroke, 2017, 12(7): 779-785.
[14]
罗冬, 李国梁, 王军文. 系统性免疫炎症指数对急性前循环大血管闭塞机械取栓首次通过效应的预测价值[J]. 中国脑血管病杂志, 2023, 20(1): 10-19.
[15]
Turk AS, Adnan S, Fifi JT, et al. Aspiration thrombectomy versus stent retriever thrombectomy as first-line approach for large vessel occlusion (COMPASS): a multicentre, randomised, open label, blinded outcome, non-inferiority trial[J]. Lancet, 2019,393(10175): 998-1008.
[16]
赵文可, 张鹏飞, 黄昌恒, 等. 支架取栓技术与接触抽吸技术治疗急性颅内大血管闭塞的Meta分析[J]. 中国临床神经外科杂志, 2018, 23(6): 388-391.
[17]
Qiu K, Zhao LB, Xu XQ, et al. Non-negligible clinical relevance of haemorrhagic transformation after endovascular thrombectomy with successful reperfusion in acute ischaemic stroke[J]. Clin Radiol, 2022, 77(1): e99-e105.
[18]
王微, 方传勤, 曹磊, 等. 老年急性前循环脑梗死病人静脉溶栓预后不良的危险因素及预测价值[J]. 实用老年医学, 2022,36(10): 1019-1023.
[19]
Yeo LLL, Bhogal P, Gopinathan A, et al. Why does mechanical thrombectomy in large vessel occlusion sometimes fail? : a review of the literature[J]. Clin Neuroradiol, 2019, 29(3): 401-414.
[20]
Sgreccia A, Duchmann Z, Desilles JP, et al. Association between acute ischemic stroke etiology and macroscopic aspect of retrieved clots: is a clot's color a warning light for underlying pathologies?[J]. J Neurointerv Surg, 2019, 11(12): 1197-1200.
[21]
Yeo LLL, Bhogal P, Gopinathan A, et al. Why does mechanical thrombectomy in large vessel occlusion sometimes fail?: a review of the literature[J]. Clin Neuroradiol. 2019, 29(3): 401-414.
[1] 洪玮, 叶细容, 刘枝红, 杨银凤, 吕志红. 超声影像组学联合临床病理特征预测乳腺癌新辅助化疗完全病理缓解的价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2024, 21(06): 571-579.
[2] 明昊, 肖迎聪, 巨艳, 宋宏萍. 乳腺癌风险预测模型的研究现状[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 287-291.
[3] 庄燕, 戴林峰, 张海东, 陈秋华, 聂清芳. 脓毒症患者早期生存影响因素及Cox 风险预测模型构建[J]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 372-378.
[4] 奚玲, 仝瀚文, 缪骥, 毛永欢, 沈晓菲, 杜峻峰, 刘晔. 基于肌少症构建的造口旁疝危险因素预测模型[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 48-51.
[5] 屈勤芳, 束方莲. 盆腔器官脱垂患者盆底重建手术后压力性尿失禁发生的影响因素及列线图预测模型构建[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 606-612.
[6] 公宇, 廖媛, 尚梅. 肝细胞癌TACE术后复发影响因素及预测模型建立[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 818-824.
[7] 孙晗, 于冰, 武侠, 周熙朗. 基于循环肿瘤DNA 甲基化的结直肠癌筛查预测模型的构建与验证[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(06): 500-506.
[8] 蔡晓雯, 李慧景, 丘婕, 杨翼帆, 吴素贤, 林玉彤, 何秋娜. 肝癌患者肝动脉化疗栓塞术后疼痛风险预测模型的构建及验证[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(08): 724-730.
[9] 韦巧玲, 黄妍, 赵昌, 宋庆峰, 陈祖毅, 黄莹, 蒙嫦, 黄靖. 肝癌微波消融术后中重度疼痛风险预测列线图模型构建及验证[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(08): 717-723.
[10] 王誉英, 刘世伟, 王睿, 曾娅玲, 涂禧慧, 张蒲蓉. 老年乳腺癌新辅助治疗病理完全缓解的预测因素分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(07): 641-646.
[11] 董晟, 郎胜坤, 葛新, 孙少君, 薛明宇. 反向休克指数乘以格拉斯哥昏迷评分对老年严重创伤患者发生急性创伤性凝血功能障碍的预测价值[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 541-547.
[12] 黄圣楷, 许斌, 苏健, 孙龙. 海南省2010~2020年乙型肝炎流行趋势的时间序列分析及预测[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 555-561.
[13] 耿晓坤. 缺血性卒中后无效再灌注的时间窗、组织窗与神经保护[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 636-636.
[14] 李璇, 邓岚, 郭微, 邓永梅, 刘杰昕. 标准化皮肤管理流程在防治脑卒中患者失禁相关性皮炎中的应用[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 479-482.
[15] 郑屹, 刘莹, 张煜坤, 李广平, 陈康寅, 刘彤. 既往及新发心房颤动对急性心肌梗死患者远期卒中风险的影响[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 406-417.
阅读次数
全文


摘要