Quantitative and Radiological Assessment of Post-cardiac-Arrest Comatose Patients with Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Background Although magnetic resonance imaging, particularly diffusion-weighted imaging, has increasingly been used as part of a multimodal approach to prognostication in patients who are comatose after cardiac arrest, the performance of quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC)...
Saved in:
Published in | Neurocritical care Vol. 42; no. 2; pp. 541 - 550 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
New York
Springer US
01.04.2025
Springer Nature B.V |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 1541-6933 1556-0961 1556-0961 |
DOI | 10.1007/s12028-024-02087-y |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Background
Although magnetic resonance imaging, particularly diffusion-weighted imaging, has increasingly been used as part of a multimodal approach to prognostication in patients who are comatose after cardiac arrest, the performance of quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps, as compared to standard radiologist impression, has not been well characterized. This retrospective study evaluated quantitative ADC analysis to the identification of anoxic brain injury by diffusion abnormalities on standard clinical magnetic resonance imaging reports.
Methods
The cohort included 204 previously described comatose patients after cardiac arrest. Clinical outcome was assessed by (1) 3–6 month post-cardiac-arrest cerebral performance category and (2) coma recovery to following commands. Radiological evaluation was obtained from clinical reports and characterized as diffuse, cortex only, deep gray matter structures only, or no anoxic injury. Quantitative analyses of ADC maps were obtained in specific regions of interest (ROIs), whole cortex, and whole brain. A subgroup analysis of 172 was performed after eliminating images with artifacts and preexisting lesions.
Results
Radiological assessment outperformed quantitative assessment over all evaluated regions (area under the curve [AUC] 0.80 for radiological interpretation and 0.70 for the occipital region, the best performing ROI,
p
= 0.011); agreement was substantial for all regions. Radiological assessment still outperformed quantitative analysis in the subgroup analysis, though by smaller margins and with substantial to near-perfect agreement. When assessing for coma recovery only, the difference was no longer significant (AUC 0.83 vs. 0.81 for the occipital region,
p
= 0.70).
Conclusions
Although quantitative analysis eliminates interrater differences in the interpretation of abnormal diffusion imaging and avoids bias from other prediction modalities, clinical radiologist interpretation has a higher predictive value for outcome. Agreement between radiological and quantitative analysis improved when using high-quality scans and when assessing for coma recovery using following commands. Quantitative assessment may thus be more subject to variability in both clinical management and scan quality than radiological assessment. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Although magnetic resonance imaging, particularly diffusion-weighted imaging, has increasingly been used as part of a multimodal approach to prognostication in patients who are comatose after cardiac arrest, the performance of quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps, as compared to standard radiologist impression, has not been well characterized. This retrospective study evaluated quantitative ADC analysis to the identification of anoxic brain injury by diffusion abnormalities on standard clinical magnetic resonance imaging reports.
The cohort included 204 previously described comatose patients after cardiac arrest. Clinical outcome was assessed by (1) 3-6 month post-cardiac-arrest cerebral performance category and (2) coma recovery to following commands. Radiological evaluation was obtained from clinical reports and characterized as diffuse, cortex only, deep gray matter structures only, or no anoxic injury. Quantitative analyses of ADC maps were obtained in specific regions of interest (ROIs), whole cortex, and whole brain. A subgroup analysis of 172 was performed after eliminating images with artifacts and preexisting lesions.
Radiological assessment outperformed quantitative assessment over all evaluated regions (area under the curve [AUC] 0.80 for radiological interpretation and 0.70 for the occipital region, the best performing ROI, p = 0.011); agreement was substantial for all regions. Radiological assessment still outperformed quantitative analysis in the subgroup analysis, though by smaller margins and with substantial to near-perfect agreement. When assessing for coma recovery only, the difference was no longer significant (AUC 0.83 vs. 0.81 for the occipital region, p = 0.70).
Although quantitative analysis eliminates interrater differences in the interpretation of abnormal diffusion imaging and avoids bias from other prediction modalities, clinical radiologist interpretation has a higher predictive value for outcome. Agreement between radiological and quantitative analysis improved when using high-quality scans and when assessing for coma recovery using following commands. Quantitative assessment may thus be more subject to variability in both clinical management and scan quality than radiological assessment. BackgroundAlthough magnetic resonance imaging, particularly diffusion-weighted imaging, has increasingly been used as part of a multimodal approach to prognostication in patients who are comatose after cardiac arrest, the performance of quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps, as compared to standard radiologist impression, has not been well characterized. This retrospective study evaluated quantitative ADC analysis to the identification of anoxic brain injury by diffusion abnormalities on standard clinical magnetic resonance imaging reports.MethodsThe cohort included 204 previously described comatose patients after cardiac arrest. Clinical outcome was assessed by (1) 3–6 month post-cardiac-arrest cerebral performance category and (2) coma recovery to following commands. Radiological evaluation was obtained from clinical reports and characterized as diffuse, cortex only, deep gray matter structures only, or no anoxic injury. Quantitative analyses of ADC maps were obtained in specific regions of interest (ROIs), whole cortex, and whole brain. A subgroup analysis of 172 was performed after eliminating images with artifacts and preexisting lesions.ResultsRadiological assessment outperformed quantitative assessment over all evaluated regions (area under the curve [AUC] 0.80 for radiological interpretation and 0.70 for the occipital region, the best performing ROI, p = 0.011); agreement was substantial for all regions. Radiological assessment still outperformed quantitative analysis in the subgroup analysis, though by smaller margins and with substantial to near-perfect agreement. When assessing for coma recovery only, the difference was no longer significant (AUC 0.83 vs. 0.81 for the occipital region, p = 0.70).ConclusionsAlthough quantitative analysis eliminates interrater differences in the interpretation of abnormal diffusion imaging and avoids bias from other prediction modalities, clinical radiologist interpretation has a higher predictive value for outcome. Agreement between radiological and quantitative analysis improved when using high-quality scans and when assessing for coma recovery using following commands. Quantitative assessment may thus be more subject to variability in both clinical management and scan quality than radiological assessment. Background Although magnetic resonance imaging, particularly diffusion-weighted imaging, has increasingly been used as part of a multimodal approach to prognostication in patients who are comatose after cardiac arrest, the performance of quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps, as compared to standard radiologist impression, has not been well characterized. This retrospective study evaluated quantitative ADC analysis to the identification of anoxic brain injury by diffusion abnormalities on standard clinical magnetic resonance imaging reports. Methods The cohort included 204 previously described comatose patients after cardiac arrest. Clinical outcome was assessed by (1) 3–6 month post-cardiac-arrest cerebral performance category and (2) coma recovery to following commands. Radiological evaluation was obtained from clinical reports and characterized as diffuse, cortex only, deep gray matter structures only, or no anoxic injury. Quantitative analyses of ADC maps were obtained in specific regions of interest (ROIs), whole cortex, and whole brain. A subgroup analysis of 172 was performed after eliminating images with artifacts and preexisting lesions. Results Radiological assessment outperformed quantitative assessment over all evaluated regions (area under the curve [AUC] 0.80 for radiological interpretation and 0.70 for the occipital region, the best performing ROI, p = 0.011); agreement was substantial for all regions. Radiological assessment still outperformed quantitative analysis in the subgroup analysis, though by smaller margins and with substantial to near-perfect agreement. When assessing for coma recovery only, the difference was no longer significant (AUC 0.83 vs. 0.81 for the occipital region, p = 0.70). Conclusions Although quantitative analysis eliminates interrater differences in the interpretation of abnormal diffusion imaging and avoids bias from other prediction modalities, clinical radiologist interpretation has a higher predictive value for outcome. Agreement between radiological and quantitative analysis improved when using high-quality scans and when assessing for coma recovery using following commands. Quantitative assessment may thus be more subject to variability in both clinical management and scan quality than radiological assessment. Although magnetic resonance imaging, particularly diffusion-weighted imaging, has increasingly been used as part of a multimodal approach to prognostication in patients who are comatose after cardiac arrest, the performance of quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps, as compared to standard radiologist impression, has not been well characterized. This retrospective study evaluated quantitative ADC analysis to the identification of anoxic brain injury by diffusion abnormalities on standard clinical magnetic resonance imaging reports.BACKGROUNDAlthough magnetic resonance imaging, particularly diffusion-weighted imaging, has increasingly been used as part of a multimodal approach to prognostication in patients who are comatose after cardiac arrest, the performance of quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps, as compared to standard radiologist impression, has not been well characterized. This retrospective study evaluated quantitative ADC analysis to the identification of anoxic brain injury by diffusion abnormalities on standard clinical magnetic resonance imaging reports.The cohort included 204 previously described comatose patients after cardiac arrest. Clinical outcome was assessed by (1) 3-6 month post-cardiac-arrest cerebral performance category and (2) coma recovery to following commands. Radiological evaluation was obtained from clinical reports and characterized as diffuse, cortex only, deep gray matter structures only, or no anoxic injury. Quantitative analyses of ADC maps were obtained in specific regions of interest (ROIs), whole cortex, and whole brain. A subgroup analysis of 172 was performed after eliminating images with artifacts and preexisting lesions.METHODSThe cohort included 204 previously described comatose patients after cardiac arrest. Clinical outcome was assessed by (1) 3-6 month post-cardiac-arrest cerebral performance category and (2) coma recovery to following commands. Radiological evaluation was obtained from clinical reports and characterized as diffuse, cortex only, deep gray matter structures only, or no anoxic injury. Quantitative analyses of ADC maps were obtained in specific regions of interest (ROIs), whole cortex, and whole brain. A subgroup analysis of 172 was performed after eliminating images with artifacts and preexisting lesions.Radiological assessment outperformed quantitative assessment over all evaluated regions (area under the curve [AUC] 0.80 for radiological interpretation and 0.70 for the occipital region, the best performing ROI, p = 0.011); agreement was substantial for all regions. Radiological assessment still outperformed quantitative analysis in the subgroup analysis, though by smaller margins and with substantial to near-perfect agreement. When assessing for coma recovery only, the difference was no longer significant (AUC 0.83 vs. 0.81 for the occipital region, p = 0.70).RESULTSRadiological assessment outperformed quantitative assessment over all evaluated regions (area under the curve [AUC] 0.80 for radiological interpretation and 0.70 for the occipital region, the best performing ROI, p = 0.011); agreement was substantial for all regions. Radiological assessment still outperformed quantitative analysis in the subgroup analysis, though by smaller margins and with substantial to near-perfect agreement. When assessing for coma recovery only, the difference was no longer significant (AUC 0.83 vs. 0.81 for the occipital region, p = 0.70).Although quantitative analysis eliminates interrater differences in the interpretation of abnormal diffusion imaging and avoids bias from other prediction modalities, clinical radiologist interpretation has a higher predictive value for outcome. Agreement between radiological and quantitative analysis improved when using high-quality scans and when assessing for coma recovery using following commands. Quantitative assessment may thus be more subject to variability in both clinical management and scan quality than radiological assessment.CONCLUSIONSAlthough quantitative analysis eliminates interrater differences in the interpretation of abnormal diffusion imaging and avoids bias from other prediction modalities, clinical radiologist interpretation has a higher predictive value for outcome. Agreement between radiological and quantitative analysis improved when using high-quality scans and when assessing for coma recovery using following commands. Quantitative assessment may thus be more subject to variability in both clinical management and scan quality than radiological assessment. |
Author | Van Roy, Sam Hsu, Liangge Snider, Samuel B. Fischer, David Lee, Jong Woo Scirica, Benjamin M. Ho, Joseph |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Sam surname: Van Roy fullname: Van Roy, Sam organization: Division of EEG and Epilepsy, Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital – sequence: 2 givenname: Liangge surname: Hsu fullname: Hsu, Liangge organization: Division of Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital – sequence: 3 givenname: Joseph surname: Ho fullname: Ho, Joseph organization: Division of EEG and Epilepsy, Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital – sequence: 4 givenname: Benjamin M. surname: Scirica fullname: Scirica, Benjamin M. organization: Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital – sequence: 5 givenname: David surname: Fischer fullname: Fischer, David organization: Department of Neurology, Hospital of Pennsylvania – sequence: 6 givenname: Samuel B. surname: Snider fullname: Snider, Samuel B. organization: Division of Neurocritical Care, Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital – sequence: 7 givenname: Jong Woo orcidid: 0000-0001-5283-7476 surname: Lee fullname: Lee, Jong Woo email: jlee38@bwh.harvard.edu organization: Division of EEG and Epilepsy, Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39164537$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNp9kUtv1TAQhS1URB_wB1ggS2zYBPxI4nh5dUuhUhGlArG0HHucukrsYjugu-8Px-UWkFiwGM0svnNmNOcYHYQYAKHnlLymhIg3mTLChoawthYZRLN7hI5o1_UNkT09uJ9b2vSS80N0nPMNIUxI0T1Bh1zSvu24OEJ3n1Ydii-6-O-AdbD4Slsf5zh5o2e8yRlyXiAUHB2-jLk0RifrtWk2KUEueBsXXWIGfFktKpfxD1-u8al3bs0-huYr-Om6gMUf9BSgeIOvIMeggwF8vujJh-kpeuz0nOHZQz9BX87eft6-by4-vjvfbi4aw1lfNwtpue2o6MAOwygYMaNrXT_akVAQQvPB9sLQVkoyQEu61rlxlDB0IxOOSX6CXu19b1P8ttbr1eKzgXnWAeKaFSeyuvNWkoq-_Ae9iWsK9TrF6cAYZR1llXrxQK3jAlbdJr_otFO__1sBtgdMijkncH8QStR9iGofoqohql8hql0V8b0oVzhMkP7u_o_qJ8SEoKg |
Cites_doi | 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116324 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.02.006 10.1212/WNL.0000000000009289 10.1212/WNL.0000000000002462 10.1212/WNL.0000000000013301 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00953-3 10.1212/WNL.98.18_supplement.1226 10.1016/j.media.2007.06.004 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x 10.1007/s12028-023-01688-3 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.01.014 10.1007/s12028-015-0179-9 10.1007/s12028-022-01498-z 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.02.049 10.1371/journal.pone.0226295 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.02.012 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001179 10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.582452 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti623 10.1016/S1474-4422(16)00015-6 10.1038/nrneurol.2014.36 10.1097/00004728-199403000-00005 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.12.034 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2018.09.012 10.1212/WNL.0000000000001742 10.1016/j.schres.2005.11.020 10.1007/s12028-018-0559-z 10.1186/1471-2105-12-77 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2022.11.003 10.1002/ana.21632 10.1007/s00134-015-3834-x 10.1148/radiol.2521081232 10.11613/BM.2012.031 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and Neurocritical Care Society 2024 Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. 2024. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and Neurocritical Care Society. Copyright Springer Nature B.V. Apr 2025 |
Copyright_xml | – notice: Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and Neurocritical Care Society 2024 Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. – notice: 2024. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and Neurocritical Care Society. – notice: Copyright Springer Nature B.V. Apr 2025 |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM K9. NAPCQ 7X8 |
DOI | 10.1007/s12028-024-02087-y |
DatabaseName | CrossRef Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Nursing & Allied Health Premium MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Nursing & Allied Health Premium MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) MEDLINE - Academic |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
EISSN | 1556-0961 |
EndPage | 550 |
ExternalDocumentID | 39164537 10_1007_s12028_024_02087_y |
Genre | Journal Article |
GroupedDBID | --- -Y2 .86 .VR 06C 06D 0R~ 0VY 123 1N0 203 29N 29~ 2J2 2JN 2JY 2KG 2KM 2LR 2VQ 2~H 30V 4.4 406 408 40D 40E 53G 5VS 6NX 7RV 7X7 8FI 8FJ 8TC 8UJ 95- 95. 95~ 96X AAAVM AABHQ AACDK AAHNG AAIAL AAJBT AAJKR AANXM AANZL AAPKM AARHV AARTL AASML AATNV AATVU AAUYE AAWCG AAWTL AAYIU AAYQN AAYTO AAYZH ABAKF ABDBE ABDZT ABECU ABFTV ABHLI ABHQN ABIPD ABJNI ABJOX ABKCH ABMNI ABMQK ABNWP ABPLI ABQBU ABSXP ABTEG ABTKH ABTMW ABUWG ABWNU ABXPI ACAOD ACBXY ACCUX ACDTI ACGFS ACHSB ACHXU ACKNC ACMDZ ACMLO ACOKC ACOMO ACPIV ACZOJ ADHHG ADHIR ADJJI ADKNI ADKPE ADRFC ADTPH ADURQ ADYFF ADZKW AEBTG AEFQL AEGAL AEGNC AEJHL AEJRE AEKMD AEMSY AENEX AEOHA AEPYU AESKC AETLH AEVLU AEXYK AFBBN AFJLC AFKRA AFLOW AFQWF AFWTZ AFZKB AGAYW AGDGC AGJBK AGMZJ AGQEE AGQMX AGRTI AGVAE AGWIL AGWZB AGYKE AHAVH AHBYD AHIZS AHSBF AIAKS AIGIU AIIXL AILAN AITGF AJBLW AJRNO AJZVZ AKMHD ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALWAN AMKLP AMXSW AMYLF AMYQR AOCGG ARMRJ AXYYD AYFIA B-. BA0 BDATZ BENPR BGNMA BSONS CAG CCPQU COF CS3 CSCUP DDRTE DNIVK DPUIP DU5 EBLON EBS EIOEI EJD ESBYG F5P FERAY FFXSO FIGPU FINBP FNLPD FRRFC FSGXE FWDCC FYUFA G-Y G-Z GGCAI GGRSB GJIRD GNWQR GQ7 H13 HF~ HG6 HLICF HMCUK HMJXF HRMNR HZ~ IJ- IKXTQ IMOTQ IWAJR IXD I~X I~Z J-C J0Z JBSCW JZLTJ KOV LLZTM M4Y MA- NAPCQ NPVJJ NQJWS NU0 O9- O9J OVD P2P P9S PF0 PHGZT PT4 QOR QOS R89 R9I ROL RPX RSV S16 S1Z S27 S37 S3B SAP SDH SHX SISQX SJYHP SMD SNE SNPRN SNX SOHCF SOJ SPISZ SRMVM SSLCW SSXJD STPWE SZ9 SZN T13 TEORI TSG TT1 TUC U2A U9L UG4 UKHRP UOJIU UTJUX UZXMN VC2 VFIZW W48 WK8 YLTOR ZMTXR ZOVNA AAYXX ABBRH ABFSG ACSTC AEZWR AFDZB AFHIU AFOHR AHPBZ AHWEU AIXLP ATHPR CITATION PHGZM CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM ABRTQ K9. 7X8 |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c326t-c79d3d5175ed88b720cbf4f6bdb01e77a38d67c149908e4054ffbb9e85b27f293 |
IEDL.DBID | U2A |
ISSN | 1541-6933 1556-0961 |
IngestDate | Fri Jul 11 11:14:02 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 25 21:15:40 EDT 2025 Fri Apr 25 03:26:14 EDT 2025 Tue Jul 01 05:12:45 EDT 2025 Fri Mar 28 01:24:07 EDT 2025 |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 2 |
Keywords | Anoxic brain injury Coma Diffusion-weighted imaging Radiological assessment Neurological recovery Cardiac arrest |
Language | English |
License | 2024. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and Neurocritical Care Society. |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c326t-c79d3d5175ed88b720cbf4f6bdb01e77a38d67c149908e4054ffbb9e85b27f293 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 |
ORCID | 0000-0001-5283-7476 |
PMID | 39164537 |
PQID | 3182212512 |
PQPubID | 6623258 |
PageCount | 10 |
ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_3095173490 proquest_journals_3182212512 pubmed_primary_39164537 crossref_primary_10_1007_s12028_024_02087_y springer_journals_10_1007_s12028_024_02087_y |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 20250400 2025-04-00 2025-Apr 20250401 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2025-04-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 4 year: 2025 text: 20250400 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | New York |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: New York – name: United States – name: Heidelberg |
PublicationTitle | Neurocritical care |
PublicationTitleAbbrev | Neurocrit Care |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Neurocrit Care |
PublicationYear | 2025 |
Publisher | Springer US Springer Nature B.V |
Publisher_xml | – name: Springer US – name: Springer Nature B.V |
References | SB Snider (2087_CR11) 2022; 98 HM Keijzer (2087_CR17) 2022; 37 SB Eickhoff (2087_CR23) 2005; 25 GD Perkins (2087_CR1) 2021; 398 S Wakana (2087_CR22) 2007; 36 J Hofmeijer (2087_CR3) 2015; 85 CA Wijman (2087_CR16) 2009; 65 JW Lee (2087_CR24) 2022; 98 A Sivaraju (2087_CR5) 2015; 41 M Ebner (2087_CR20) 2020; 206 M Mlynash (2087_CR9) 2010; 41 JP Nolan (2087_CR31) 2021; 161 T Sing (2087_CR27) 2005; 21 AO Rossetti (2087_CR2) 2016; 15 Y Benjamini (2087_CR28) 1995; 57 MB Bevers (2087_CR12) 2018; 29 E Westhall (2087_CR4) 2016; 86 H Fenter (2087_CR30) 2023; 182 R Wei (2087_CR10) 2019; 14 HM Keijzer (2087_CR33) 2018; 133 BB Avants (2087_CR19) 2008; 12 N Makris (2087_CR21) 2006; 83 O Wu (2087_CR15) 2009; 252 ML McHugh (2087_CR29) 2012; 22 R Barth (2087_CR25) 2020; 149 2087_CR32 KG Hirsch (2087_CR8) 2020; 94 X Robin (2087_CR26) 2011; 12 DM Greer (2087_CR6) 2014; 10 HM Keijzer (2087_CR13) 2020; 149 DL Collins (2087_CR18) 1994; 18 V Rajajee (2087_CR7) 2023; 38 KG Hirsch (2087_CR14) 2016; 24 |
References_xml | – volume: 206 start-page: 116324 year: 2020 ident: 2087_CR20 publication-title: Neuroimage doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116324 – volume: 149 start-page: 240 year: 2020 ident: 2087_CR13 publication-title: Resuscitation doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.02.006 – volume: 94 start-page: e1684 year: 2020 ident: 2087_CR8 publication-title: Neurology doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000009289 – volume: 86 start-page: 1482 year: 2016 ident: 2087_CR4 publication-title: Neurology doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000002462 – volume: 98 start-page: e1238 year: 2022 ident: 2087_CR11 publication-title: Neurology doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000013301 – volume: 398 start-page: 1269 year: 2021 ident: 2087_CR1 publication-title: Lancet doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00953-3 – volume: 98 start-page: e1226 year: 2022 ident: 2087_CR24 publication-title: Neurology doi: 10.1212/WNL.98.18_supplement.1226 – volume: 12 start-page: 26 year: 2008 ident: 2087_CR19 publication-title: Med Image Anal doi: 10.1016/j.media.2007.06.004 – volume: 57 start-page: 289 year: 1995 ident: 2087_CR28 publication-title: J R Stat Soc B doi: 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x – volume: 38 start-page: 533 year: 2023 ident: 2087_CR7 publication-title: Neurocrit Care doi: 10.1007/s12028-023-01688-3 – volume: 149 start-page: 217 year: 2020 ident: 2087_CR25 publication-title: Resuscitation doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.01.014 – volume: 24 start-page: 82 year: 2016 ident: 2087_CR14 publication-title: Neurocrit Care doi: 10.1007/s12028-015-0179-9 – volume: 37 start-page: 302 year: 2022 ident: 2087_CR17 publication-title: Neurocrit Care doi: 10.1007/s12028-022-01498-z – volume: 36 start-page: 630 year: 2007 ident: 2087_CR22 publication-title: Neuroimage doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.02.049 – volume: 14 start-page: e0226295 year: 2019 ident: 2087_CR10 publication-title: PLoS ONE doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226295 – volume: 161 start-page: 220 year: 2021 ident: 2087_CR31 publication-title: Resuscitation doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.02.012 – ident: 2087_CR32 doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001179 – volume: 41 start-page: 1665 year: 2010 ident: 2087_CR9 publication-title: Stroke doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.582452 – volume: 21 start-page: 3940 year: 2005 ident: 2087_CR27 publication-title: Bioinformatics doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti623 – volume: 15 start-page: 597 year: 2016 ident: 2087_CR2 publication-title: Lancet Neurol doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(16)00015-6 – volume: 10 start-page: 190 year: 2014 ident: 2087_CR6 publication-title: Nat Rev Neurol doi: 10.1038/nrneurol.2014.36 – volume: 18 start-page: 192 year: 1994 ident: 2087_CR18 publication-title: J Comput Assist Tomogr doi: 10.1097/00004728-199403000-00005 – volume: 25 start-page: 1325 year: 2005 ident: 2087_CR23 publication-title: Neuroimage doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.12.034 – volume: 133 start-page: 124 year: 2018 ident: 2087_CR33 publication-title: Resuscitation doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2018.09.012 – volume: 85 start-page: 137 year: 2015 ident: 2087_CR3 publication-title: Neurology doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000001742 – volume: 83 start-page: 155 year: 2006 ident: 2087_CR21 publication-title: Schizophr Res doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2005.11.020 – volume: 29 start-page: 396 year: 2018 ident: 2087_CR12 publication-title: Neurocrit Care doi: 10.1007/s12028-018-0559-z – volume: 12 start-page: 77 year: 2011 ident: 2087_CR26 publication-title: BMC Bioinformatics doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-12-77 – volume: 182 start-page: 109637 year: 2023 ident: 2087_CR30 publication-title: Resuscitation doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2022.11.003 – volume: 65 start-page: 394 year: 2009 ident: 2087_CR16 publication-title: Ann Neurol doi: 10.1002/ana.21632 – volume: 41 start-page: 1264 year: 2015 ident: 2087_CR5 publication-title: Intensive Care Med doi: 10.1007/s00134-015-3834-x – volume: 252 start-page: 173 year: 2009 ident: 2087_CR15 publication-title: Radiology doi: 10.1148/radiol.2521081232 – volume: 22 start-page: 276 year: 2012 ident: 2087_CR29 publication-title: Biochem Med doi: 10.11613/BM.2012.031 |
SSID | ssj0027975 |
Score | 2.3942592 |
Snippet | Background
Although magnetic resonance imaging, particularly diffusion-weighted imaging, has increasingly been used as part of a multimodal approach to... Although magnetic resonance imaging, particularly diffusion-weighted imaging, has increasingly been used as part of a multimodal approach to prognostication in... BackgroundAlthough magnetic resonance imaging, particularly diffusion-weighted imaging, has increasingly been used as part of a multimodal approach to... |
SourceID | proquest pubmed crossref springer |
SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database Publisher |
StartPage | 541 |
SubjectTerms | Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Cardiac arrest Coma Coma - diagnostic imaging Coma - etiology Coma - pathology Critical Care Medicine Datasets Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging - standards Female Heart Arrest - complications Humans Hypoxia, Brain - diagnosis Hypoxia, Brain - diagnostic imaging Hypoxia, Brain - etiology Hypoxia, Brain - pathology Intensive Internal Medicine Magnetic resonance imaging Male Medical records Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Neurology Neurosurgery Original Work Patients Radiology Regression analysis Retrospective Studies Review boards Statistical analysis |
Title | Quantitative and Radiological Assessment of Post-cardiac-Arrest Comatose Patients with Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging |
URI | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12028-024-02087-y https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39164537 https://www.proquest.com/docview/3182212512 https://www.proquest.com/docview/3095173490 |
Volume | 42 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwlV1Lb9swDCbaBhh6Gbbu0WxtoQK7bQJsWbLso7ElS1tk2IYFS0-GnkUPdYYlOeS-Hz5KsRMUaQ89W5AEfxT1kRRJgA-cm4SVArWfMBnlijOqFbe04IUSjjkuTchGHn_LRxN-ORXTNils3r1270KSUVNvk91YrKbMOA2NJSVd7UNPBNsdpXjCqq2ZVcbyusgNUpqjvd6myjw8x_3raIdj7sRH47UzfAHPW75IqjXAL2HPNUfwbNxGxF_Bvx9L1cREMVRbRDWW_FT2ttNopNoU3iQzT0JnXmqiTBhaxbYcBBUC2t1zR76vK6zOSXDNki-33i-DJ43-js5TZ8lY3TQh5ZEEl3-o0-HIxV1scvQaJsPBr88j2nZWoAbpGq4kS5tZgdTB2aLQkiVGe-5zbXWSOilVVthcGrSeyqRwyOm491qXrhCaSY8M4Q0cNLPGHQMRmUlTxaRVMuMu0B9vCzzLNnWJVnnSh4_dD67_rAto1NtSyQGOGuGoIxz1qg8nHQZ1e5jmNaodxiIR68P55jMegxDbUI2bLXFMoIq4gxIXfLvGbrNcyC3mIpN9-NSBuZ388b28e9rw93DIQm_g-KrnBA4Wf5fuFAnLQp9Br_p6fTU4i3L6H8lN5M0 |
linkProvider | Springer Nature |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwlV3LT9swGP8ERRq7TLzXrYAncRuWEseJnWM1hsqjaJuoxi3yE_VAiig9cOcP57ObtJpgB86xbCs_-_PvewMccW4SVuYo_XKTUa44o1pxSyWXKnfMcWFCNvLwqhiM-PlNftMkhU3baPfWJRkl9TLZjcVqyozT0FhS0KdVWEMyIEMg14j1l2pWGcvrIjdIaYH6epMq8_Yc_z5HrzjmK_9ofHZON-BTwxdJfw7wJqy4egs-DBuP-DY8_56pOiaKodgiqrbkj7LjVqKR_qLwJpl4EjrzUhPPhKH92JaDoEBAvXvqyK95hdUpCaZZcjL2fhYsafRvNJ46S4bqtg4pjySY_EOdDkfO7mKTox0Ynf68_jGgTWcFapCu4UqitJnNkTo4K6UWLDHac19oq5PUCaEyaQthUHsqE-mQ03HvtS6dzDUTHhnCLnTqSe0-A8kzk6aKCatExl2gP95KvMs2dYlWRdKF7-0Pru7nBTSqZankAEeFcFQRjuqpC70Wg6q5TNMKxQ5jkYh14dviM16D4NtQtZvMcEygiriDEhfcm2O3WC7kFvM8E104bsFcTv7_vXx53_BDWB9cDy-ry7Ori6_wkYU-wTHCpwedx4eZ20fy8qgP4ll9AYkV5iw |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwlV1LT-MwEB7xkBCX1fJYtjwWI3EDi8Rx4uRYLVS8igBRLbfIT8RhU7RtD9z54YydpAUBhz3Hsq2MPf5m7O8bgH3OdcSKFL1fqhPKJWdUSW5oznOZWma50J6N3L_KTgf8_D69f8PiD6_d2yvJmtPgVZqq8dGTcUcz4hsLysqMU19kUtDneVhEdxz7dT1g3VnIVQSpXcQJMc0wdm9oM5_38f5o-oA3P9yVhiOo9x2-NdiRdGtjr8CcrVZhqd_cjq_By81EVoE0hi6MyMqQW2keW-9GulMRTjJ0xFfppTqsD027oUQHQeeAMfjIkutabXVEfJqWHD86N_FZNfonJFKtIX35UHn6I_Hpf6_ZYcnZ31DwaB0GvZO736e0qbJANUI3HEkUJjEpwghr8lwJFmnluMuUUVFshZBJbjKhMZIqotwivuPOKVXYPFVMOEQLP2ChGlb2J5A00XEsmTBSJNx6KORMjvvaxDZSMos6cND-4PKpFtMoZ7LJ3hwlmqMM5iifO7Dd2qBsNtaoRBfEWABlHdibfsYt4e85ZGWHE2zjYSPOoMABN2rbTYfzPGOeJqIDh60xZ51_PZfN_2u-C0vXx73y8uzqYguWmS8ZHB77bMPC-N_E7iCOGatfYam-AsN96mg |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Quantitative+and+Radiological+Assessment+of+Post-cardiac-Arrest+Comatose+Patients+with+Diffusion-Weighted+Magnetic+Resonance+Imaging&rft.jtitle=Neurocritical+care&rft.date=2025-04-01&rft.pub=Springer+Nature+B.V&rft.issn=1541-6933&rft.eissn=1556-0961&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=541&rft.epage=550&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2Fs12028-024-02087-y&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1541-6933&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1541-6933&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1541-6933&client=summon |