IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0176622.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative accuracy of CT perfusion in diagnosing acute ischemic stroke: A systematic review of 27 trials

Author

Listed:
  • Jiantong Shen
  • Xianglian Li
  • Youping Li
  • Bing Wu

Abstract

Objective: To systematically evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of CT perfusion (CTP), non-enhanced computed tomography (NCCT) and computed tomography angiography (CTA) in detecting acute ischemic stroke. Methods: We searched seven databases and screened the reference lists of the included studies. The risk of bias in the study quality was assessed using QUADASII. We produced paired forest plots in RevMan to show the variation of the sensitivity and specificity estimates together with their 95% CI. We used a hierarchical summary ROC model to summarize the sensitivity and specificity of CTP in detecting ischemic stroke. Results: We identified 27 studies with a total of 2168 patients. The pooled sensitivity of CTP for acute ischemic stroke was 82% (95% CI 75–88%), and the specificity was 96% (95% CI 89–99%). CTP was more sensitive than NCCT and had a similar accuracy with CTA. There were no statistically significant differences in the sensitivity and specificity between patients who underwent CTP within 6 hours of symptom onset and beyond 6 hours after symptom onset. No adverse events were reported in the included studies. Conclusions: CTP is more accurate than NCCT and has similar accuracy to CTA in detecting acute ischemic stroke. However, the evidence is not strong. There is potential benefit of using CTP to select stroke patients for treatment, but more high-quality evidence is needed to confirm this result.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiantong Shen & Xianglian Li & Youping Li & Bing Wu, 2017. "Comparative accuracy of CT perfusion in diagnosing acute ischemic stroke: A systematic review of 27 trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0176622
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176622
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176622
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176622&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0176622?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0176622. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.