Evidence Hub

Comparison of Ultra-Early Hematoma Growth and Common Noncontrast Computed Tomography Features in Predicting Hematoma Enlargement in Patients with Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Xiang Y, Zhang T, Li Y, Liu J, Xu H, He W, Chen Q, Yang Y

World neurosurgery, 2020

920 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Ultra-early hematoma growth (uHG), the black hole sign, and the blend sign are common predictors of hematoma enlargement (HE). This study aimed to develop a new diagnostic criterion for predicting HE using uHG and to compare the accuracy of uHG, the black hole sign, and the blend sign in predicting HE in patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH).

METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data of 920 patients with sICH from August 2013 to January 2018. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted to determine the optimal threshold values of uHG to predict HE. The effects of the black hole sign, blend sign, and uHG on HE were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models, and their prediction accuracies were analyzed using receiver operator analyses.

RESULTS: The black hole sign was identified in 131 patients, the blend sign in 163 patients, and uHG >6.46 mL/h in 441 patients. Logistic analysis showed that the black hole sign, blend sign, and uHG >6.46 mL/h were independent predictors of HE. The sensitivity values of uHG >6.46 mL/h, the black hole sign, and the blend sign were 70.43%, 24.19%, and 36.56%, respectively, and specificity values were 57.77%, 88.28%, and 87.06%, respectively. uHG had the greatest area under the curve. The black hole and blend signs were more commonly found in patients with uHG >6.46 mL/h (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: uHG >6.46 mL/h was the optimal predictor used for identifying patients at high risk…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, 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: 920 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