ObjectiveTo provide precise estimates of the association between noncontrast CT (NCCT) markers, hematoma expansion ( HE), and functional outcome in patients presenting with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched PubMed for English-written observational studies or randomized controlled trials reporting data on NCCT markers of HE and outcome in spontaneous ICH including at least 50 subjects. The outcomes of interest were HE (hematoma growth >33%, >33% and/or >6 mL, >33% and/or >12.5 mL), poor functional outcome ( modified Rankin Scale 3-6 or 4-6) at discharge or at 90 days, and mortality. We pooled data in random- effects models and extracted cumulative odds ratio (OR) for each NCCT marker.ResultsWe included 25 eligible studies (n = 10,650). The following markers were associated with increased risk of HE and poor outcome, respectively: black hole sign (OR = 3.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.42-9.64 and OR = 5.26, 95% CI = 1.75-15.76), swirl sign (OR = 3.33, 95% CI = 2.42-4.60 and OR = 3.70; 95% CI = 2.47-5.55), heterogeneous density (OR = 2.74; 95% CI = 1.71-4.39 and OR = 2.80; 95% CI = 1.78-4.39), blend sign (OR = 3.49; 95% CI = 2.20-5.55 and OR = 2.21; 95% CI 1.16-4.18), hypodensities (OR = 3.47; 95% CI = 2.18-5.50 and OR = 2.94; 95% CI = 2.28-3.78), irregular shape (OR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.27-3.19 and OR = 3.43; 95% CI = 2.33-5.03), and island sign (OR = 7.87, 95% CI = 2.17-28.47 and OR = 6.05, 95% CI = 4.44-8.24).ConclusionOur results suggest that multiple NCCT ICH shape and density features, with different effect size, are important markers for HE and clinical outcome and may provide useful information for future randomized controlled trials.

Noncontrast CT markers of intracerebral hemorrhage expansion and poor outcome: A meta-analysis

Morotti, Andrea;
2020-01-01

Abstract

ObjectiveTo provide precise estimates of the association between noncontrast CT (NCCT) markers, hematoma expansion ( HE), and functional outcome in patients presenting with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched PubMed for English-written observational studies or randomized controlled trials reporting data on NCCT markers of HE and outcome in spontaneous ICH including at least 50 subjects. The outcomes of interest were HE (hematoma growth >33%, >33% and/or >6 mL, >33% and/or >12.5 mL), poor functional outcome ( modified Rankin Scale 3-6 or 4-6) at discharge or at 90 days, and mortality. We pooled data in random- effects models and extracted cumulative odds ratio (OR) for each NCCT marker.ResultsWe included 25 eligible studies (n = 10,650). The following markers were associated with increased risk of HE and poor outcome, respectively: black hole sign (OR = 3.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.42-9.64 and OR = 5.26, 95% CI = 1.75-15.76), swirl sign (OR = 3.33, 95% CI = 2.42-4.60 and OR = 3.70; 95% CI = 2.47-5.55), heterogeneous density (OR = 2.74; 95% CI = 1.71-4.39 and OR = 2.80; 95% CI = 1.78-4.39), blend sign (OR = 3.49; 95% CI = 2.20-5.55 and OR = 2.21; 95% CI 1.16-4.18), hypodensities (OR = 3.47; 95% CI = 2.18-5.50 and OR = 2.94; 95% CI = 2.28-3.78), irregular shape (OR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.27-3.19 and OR = 3.43; 95% CI = 2.33-5.03), and island sign (OR = 7.87, 95% CI = 2.17-28.47 and OR = 6.05, 95% CI = 4.44-8.24).ConclusionOur results suggest that multiple NCCT ICH shape and density features, with different effect size, are important markers for HE and clinical outcome and may provide useful information for future randomized controlled trials.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11379/614637
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 27
  • Scopus 74
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 63
social impact