Evidence Hub

Noncontrast Computed Tomography Signs as Predictors of Hematoma Expansion, Clinical Outcome, and Response to Tranexamic Acid in Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Law ZK, Ali A, Krishnan K, Bischoff A, Appleton JP, Scutt P, Woodhouse L, Pszczolkowski S et al.

Stroke, 2020

2,325 participants · 77 citations

Abstract

Background and Purpose— Blend, black hole, island signs, and hypodensities are reported to predict hematoma expansion in acute intracerebral hemorrhage. We explored the value of these noncontrast computed tomography signs in predicting hematoma expansion and functional outcome in our cohort of intracerebral hemorrhage. Methods— The TICH-2 (Tranexamic acid for IntraCerebral Hemorrhage-2) was a prospective randomized controlled trial exploring the efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in acute intracerebral hemorrhage. Baseline and 24-hour computed tomography scans of trial participants were analyzed. Hematoma expansion was defined as an increase in hematoma volume of >33% or >6 mL on 24-hour computed tomography. Poor functional outcome was defined as modified Rankin Scale of 4 to 6 at day 90. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of hematoma expansion and poor functional outcome. Results— Of 2325 patients recruited, 2077 (89.3%) had valid baseline and 24-hour scans. Five hundred seventy patients (27.4%) had hematoma expansion while 1259 patients (54.6%) had poor functional outcome. The prevalence of noncontrast computed tomography signs was blend sign, 366 (16.1%); black hole sign, 414 (18.2%); island sign, 200 (8.8%); and hypodensities, 701 (30.2%). Blend sign (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.53 [95% CI, 1.16–2.03]; P =0.003), black hole (aOR, 2.03 [1.34–3.08]; P =0.001), and hypodensities (aOR, 2.06 [1.48–2.89]; P 0.05). Conclusions— Blend…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 2,325 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