Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

What is a meaningful difference when using infarct volume as the primary outcome? Results from the hermes database

  • Leon A. Rinkel
  • , Johanna M. Ospel
  • , Scott B. Brown
  • , Bruce C.V. Campbell
  • , Diederik W.J. Dippel
  • , Andrew M. Demchuk
  • , Charles B.L.M. Majoie
  • , Peter J. Mitchell
  • , Serge Bracard
  • , Francis Guillemin
  • , Tudor G. Jovin
  • , Keith W. Muir
  • , Philip White
  • , Jeffrey L. Saver
  • , Michael D. Hill
  • , Mayank Goyal*
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • Amsterdam University Medical Centers
  • University of Calgary
  • BRIGHT Research Partners
  • Melbourne Brain Centre
  • Erasmus MC
  • University of Melbourne
  • CHU de Nancy
  • University of Pittsburgh
  • University of Glasgow
  • Newcastle University
  • David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

13 Scopus citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Ischemic stroke lesion volume at follow-up is an important surrogate outcome for acute stroke trials. We aimed to assess which differences in 48-hour lesion volume translate into meaningful clinical differences. METHODS: We used pooled data from 7 trials investigating the efficacy of endovascular treatment for anterior circulation large vessel occlusion in acute ischemic stroke. We assessed 48-hour lesion volume follow-up computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. The primary outcome was a good functional outcome, defined as modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores of 0 to 2. We performed multivariable logistic regression to predict the probability of achieving mRS scores of 0 to 2 and determined the differences in 48-hour lesion volume that correspond to a change of 1%, 5%, and 10% in the adjusted probability of achieving mRS scores of 0 to 2. RESULTS: In total, 1665/1766 (94.2%) patients (median age, 68 [interquartile range, 57-76] years, 781 [46.9%] female) had information on follow-up ischemic lesion volume. Computed tomography was used for follow-up imaging in 83% of patients. The median 48-hour lesion volume was 41 (interquartile range, 14-120) mL. We observed a linear relationship between 48-hour lesion volume and mRS scores of 0 to 2 for adjusted probabilities between 65% and 20%/volumes <80 mL, although the curve sloped off for lower mRS scores of 0-2 probabilities/higher volumes. The median differences in 48-hour lesion volume associated with a 1%, 5%, and 10% increase in the probability of mRS scores of 0 to 2 for volumes <80 mL were 2 (interquartile range, 2-3), 10 (9-11), and 20 (18-23) mL, respectively. We found comparable associations when assessing computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging separately. CONCLUSIONS: A difference of 2, 10, and 20 mL in 48-hour lesion volume, respectively, is associated with a 1%, 5%, and 10% absolute increase in the probability of achieving good functional outcome. These results can inform the design of future stroke trials that use 48-hour lesion volume as the primary outcome.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)866-873
Number of pages8
JournalStroke
Volume55
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Apr 2024
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • clinical relevance
  • infarction
  • ischemic stroke
  • magnetic resonance imaging
  • stroke

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'What is a meaningful difference when using infarct volume as the primary outcome? Results from the hermes database'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this