Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The clinical differentiation between acute ischemic stroke and epileptic seizure may be challenging, and making the correct diagnosis could avoid unnecessary reperfusion therapy. We examined the accuracy of CTP in discriminating epileptic seizures from acute ischemic stroke without identified arterial occlusion.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We retrospectively identified consecutive patients in our emergency department who underwent CTP in the 4.5 hours following the development of an acute focal neurologic deficit who were discharged with a final diagnosis of acute ischemic stroke or epileptic seizure.
RESULTS
Among 95 patients, the final diagnosis was epileptic seizure in 45 and acute ischemic stroke in 50. CTP findings were abnormal in 73% of the patients with epileptic seizure and 40% of those with acute ischemic stroke. Hyperperfusion was observed more frequently in the seizure group (36% versus 2% for acute ischemic stroke) with high specificity (98%) but low sensitivity (35%) for the diagnosis of epileptic seizure. Hypoperfusion was found in 38% of cases in each group and was not confined to a vascular territory in 24% of patients in the seizure group and 2% in the acute ischemic stroke group. The interobserver agreement was good (κ = 0.60) for hypo-, hyper-, and normoperfusion patterns and moderate (κ = 0.41) for the evaluation of vascular systematization.
CONCLUSIONS
CTP patterns helped to differentiate acute ischemic stroke from epileptic seizure in a “code stroke” situation. Our results indicate that a hyperperfusion pattern, especially if not restricted to a vascular territory, may suggest reconsideration of intravenous thrombolysis therapy.
Read this article: https://bit.ly/3sRK1Xk
Editor’s Choice
CTP patterns helped to differentiate acute ischemic stroke from epileptic seizure in a “code stroke“ situation. The results indicate that a hyperperfusion pattern, especially if not restricted to a vascular territory, may suggest reconsideration of intravenous thrombolytic therapy.