Evidence Hub

A Pooled Analysis of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Lesions in Patients With Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Murthy SB, Cho SM, Gupta A, Shoamanesh A, Navi BB, Avadhani R, Gruber J, Li Y et al.

JAMA neurology, 2020

4,782 participants

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: The etiology and significance of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) lesions in patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate which factors are associated with DWI lesions, whether associated factors differ by ICH location, and whether DWI lesions are associated with functional outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This analysis pooled individual patient data from 3 randomized clinical trials (Minimally Invasive Surgery Plus Alteplase for Intracerebral Hemorrhage Evacuation phase 3 trial, Antihypertensive Treatment of Acute Cerebral Hemorrhage trial, and Intracerebral Hemorrhage Deferoxamine phase 2 trial) and 1 multicenter prospective study (Ethnic/Racial Variations of Intracerebral Hemorrhage). Patients were enrolled from August 1, 2010, to September 30, 2018. Of the 4782 patients, 1788 who underwent magnetic resonance imaging scans of the brain were included. Data were analyzed from July 1 to December 31, 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome consisted of factors associated with DWI lesions. Secondary outcomes were poor functional outcome, defined as a modified Rankin score (mRS) of 4 to 6, and mortality, both assessed at 3 months. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between exposures and outcomes. Subgroup analyses stratified by hematoma location were performed.

RESULTS: After exclusion of 36 patients with missing data on DWI lesions, 1752 patients were included…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 4,782 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free