Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds
LetterLETTER

Comments on an Article by Kamalian et al

P. Schramm and E. Klotz
American Journal of Neuroradiology June 2012, 33 (6) E94; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A3153
P. Schramm
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
E. Klotz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

We read with great interest the article by Kamalian et al.1 The authors found, in a carefully selected patient group, that CT perfusion mean transit time maps optimally distinguished benign oligemia from true “at-risk” ischemic penumbra. They postprocessed the same dynamic CT data with 2 commercial software packages from the same vendor, containing a standard and a delay-corrected (DC) deconvolution algorithm, respectively.

For each algorithm considered separately, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis yielded a significantly higher area under the curve for absolute and relative MTT than for the other CTP parameters for identification of brain tissue destined to infarct (all P values < .01). The authors also found that thresholds needed to be adapted. They reported that “absolute and relative MTT thresholds for defining penumbra were 12 seconds and 249% for the standard and 13.5 seconds and 150% for the delay-corrected algorithms, respectively.” That thresholds may vary considerably among different approaches and implementations is well known, but their results appear to have an internal discrepancy that requires clarification. Relative MTTs were calculated by normalizing the ischemic MTT to the one for the corresponding anatomy on the contralateral side. Therefore, one can reversely deduce that the average MTT of the normal brain by using the standard algorithm in their data was approximately 4.8 seconds (12/2.49 seconds); the one in the delay-corrected version, however, would have to be approximately 9 seconds (13.5/1.5 seconds). Nine seconds would be in total disagreement with basically all normal MTT values that can be found in the literature (eg, Wintermark et al2), which are more in the range of 4–6 seconds (in agreement with the results of the standard algorithm).

In addition, a DC algorithm would tend to have an even shorter MTT.3 The gross whole-brain transit time can be estimated from the peak time difference of the arterial input function and the venous outflow function. In our experience, this difference is typically between 6 and 8 seconds; tissue MTT must be shorter. Figures 3 and 4 in a recent review article coauthored by 2 of the authors of the present study clearly confirm this.4 If there was no accidental misreporting of numbers, this discrepancy definitely requires an explanation and discussion.

Furthermore, the authors argue at length that DC algorithms are superior to standard ones because they are better adapted to the variable arrival times. We fully agree. Their data, however, appear to demonstrate the opposite. All areas under the curve and specificities for the standard algorithm are consistently higher than those for DC. If the next accurate parameter was CBF, as they report, and the difference between 0.76/0.78 (MTT standard) and 0.73/0.74 (CBF standard) was significant at P < .01, then clearly the difference between 0.76/0.78 (MTT standard) and 0.72/0.71 (MTT DC) will have similar or higher significance. If one were to use the authors' reasoning about optimal performance, one could also draw the conclusion that the CBF of standard deconvolution software (CTP3 “Std,” GE Healthcare) performs better than the MTT of delay-corrected software (CTP5 “DC”; GE Healthcare). We believe this issue requires further explanation and discussion.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Kamalian S,
    2. Kamalian S,
    3. Konstas AA,
    4. et al
    . CT perfusion mean transit time maps optimally distinguish benign oligemia from true “at-risk” ischemic penumbra, but thresholds vary by postprocessing technique. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012; 33: 545– 49
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Wintermark M,
    2. Flanders AE,
    3. Velthuis B,
    4. et al
    . Perfusion-CT assessment of infarct core and penumbra: receiver operating characteristic curve analysis in 130 patients suspected of acute hemispheric stroke. Stroke 2006; 37: 979– 85
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Abels B,
    2. Klotz E,
    3. Tomandl BF,
    4. et al
    . Perfusion CT in acute ischemic stroke: a qualitative and quantitative comparison of deconvolution and maximum slope approach. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010; 31: 1690– 98
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Konstas AA,
    2. Wintermark M,
    3. Lev MH
    . CT perfusion imaging in acute stroke. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 2011; 21: 215– 38, ix
    CrossRefPubMed
  • © 2012 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 33 (6)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 33, Issue 6
1 Jun 2012
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
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.
Comments on an Article by Kamalian et al
(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.
Citation Tools
Comments on an Article by Kamalian et al
P. Schramm, E. Klotz
American Journal of Neuroradiology Jun 2012, 33 (6) E94; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3153

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Comments on an Article by Kamalian et al
P. Schramm, E. Klotz
American Journal of Neuroradiology Jun 2012, 33 (6) E94; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3153
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Reply:
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • 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

  • Pattern Recognition in Mitochondrial Leukodystrophies is Hampered by the Peculiarities of Mitochondrial Genetics
  • Callosal Angle Narrowing in Research Data Bases of the Cognitively Impaired
  • Reply:
Show more Letters

Similar Articles

Advertisement

News and Updates

  • Lucien Levy Best Research Article Award
  • Thanks to our 2021 Distinguished Reviewers
  • Press Releases

Resources

  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • How to Participate in a Tweet Chat
  • AJNR Podcast Archive
  • Ideas for Publicizing Your Research
  • Librarian Resources
  • Terms and Conditions

Opportunities

  • Share Your Art in Perspectives
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons
  • Moderate a Tweet Chat

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Neurographics
  • ASNR Annual Meeting
  • Fellowship Portal
  • Position Statements

© 2022 by the American Society of Neuroradiology | Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire