2018
DOI: 10.5582/bst.2018.01061
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A reliable grading system for prediction of hematoma expansion in intracerebral hemorrhage in the basal ganglia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Another new Hematoma Expansion Prediction (HEP) score added a history of dementia and smoking and showed satisfactory discrimination ability (C-statistics, 0.76) ( 98 ). Based on multivariable logistic regression analysis, a basal ganglia score adopted three NCCT markers (island sign, blend sign, and swirl sign) and demonstrated reliable accuracy in predicting HE ( P < 0.001) ( 99 ). Furthermore, to further simplify the prediction at the bedside, three new scales (the BAT score, NAG scale, and HEAVN scale) which added more practical predictors have been established from retrospective studies and have shown acceptable sensitivity and specificity ( 33 , 34 , 100 , 101 ), but prospective validations of these scores are warranted.…”
Section: Prediction Score Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another new Hematoma Expansion Prediction (HEP) score added a history of dementia and smoking and showed satisfactory discrimination ability (C-statistics, 0.76) ( 98 ). Based on multivariable logistic regression analysis, a basal ganglia score adopted three NCCT markers (island sign, blend sign, and swirl sign) and demonstrated reliable accuracy in predicting HE ( P < 0.001) ( 99 ). Furthermore, to further simplify the prediction at the bedside, three new scales (the BAT score, NAG scale, and HEAVN scale) which added more practical predictors have been established from retrospective studies and have shown acceptable sensitivity and specificity ( 33 , 34 , 100 , 101 ), but prospective validations of these scores are warranted.…”
Section: Prediction Score Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several prediction systems, independent of CTA spot sign, have been published for predicting HE ( 11 , 12 , 22 , 24 , 37 , 40 44 ) ( Supplementary Table S3 ). However, none has actually improved clinical or research decision-making.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, CTA examination is expensive, inaccessible in poverty-stricken regions, and not suitable for patients with contraindications, such as contrast reaction or renal impairment. Researchers have also developed some models based on non-contrast CT (NCCT) markers, such as blend sign, swirl sign, island sign, and hypodensity ( 11 , 12 ). However, these markers show overlapped definitions, and a consensus of diagnostic criteria for HE lacks, all limiting the sensitivity of previous models in predicting the risk of HE ( 13 15 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some models [9,13,[15][16][17][18][19] had been published, but there are following defects:1. Models are complex and user-unfriendly, which cannot apply to all patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5. Several studies [7][8][9][14][15][16] have confirmed that HE is an independent risk factor for early deterioration of neurological function and poor long-term prognosis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%