SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2019 / Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 1

Comparison of conventional and modern methods in determining ischemic stroke etiology by general and stroke neurologists

Mustafa Kürşad KUTLUK
Vesile ÖZTÜRK
Nazire AFŞAR
Ali Kemal ERDEMOĞLU
Refik KUNT
Bedile İrem TİFTİKÇİOĞLU
Muhteşem GEDİZLİOĞLU
Pages
170–177
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This suggests thatthe automatic, evidence-based, easily reproducible CCS system was superior to the TOAST system.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background/aim: This study aimed to investigate the consistency between stroke and general neurologists in subtype assignment usingthe Trial of ORG-10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) and Causative Classification of Stroke (CCS) systems.Materials and methods: Fifty consecutive acute ischemic stroke patients admitted to the stroke unit were recruited.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Concordance among all four neurologists was investigated andevaluated using the kappa (ĸ) value.Results: The kappa (ĸ) value of diagnostic compliance between stroke neurologists was 0.61 (95% CI: 0.45–0.77) for TOAST and 0.78(95% CI: 0.62–0.94) for CSS-5.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This suggests thatthe automatic, evidence-based, easily reproducible CCS system was superior to the TOAST system.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Background/aim: This study aimed to investigate the consistency between stroke and general neurologists in subtype assignment usingthe Trial of ORG-10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) and Causative Classification of Stroke (CCS) systems.Materials and methods: Fifty consecutive acute ischemic stroke patients admitted to the stroke unit were recruited. Patients wereclassified by two stroke and two general neurologists, each from different medical centers, according to TOAST followed by the CCS.Each neurologist was assessed for consistency and compliance in pairs. Concordance among all four neurologists was investigated andevaluated using the kappa (ĸ) value.Results: The kappa (ĸ) value of diagnostic compliance between stroke neurologists was 0.61 (95% CI: 0.45–0.77) for TOAST and 0.78(95% CI: 0.62–0.94) for CSS-5. The kappa (ĸ) value was 0.64 (95% CI: 0.48–0.80) for TOAST and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.60–0.91) for CCS-5 forgeneral neurologists. Compliance was moderate [ĸ: 0.59 (95% CI: 0.52–0.65)] for TOAST and was strong [ĸ: 0.75 (95% CI: 0.68–0.81)]for CCS-5 for all 4 neurologists. ‘Cardioembolism’ (91.04%) had the highest compliance in both systems. The frequency of the groupwith ‘undetermined etiologies’ was less in the CCS (26%) compared to TOAST.Conclusion: The CCS system improved compliance in both stroke and general neurologists compared with TOAST. This suggests thatthe automatic, evidence-based, easily reproducible CCS system was superior to the TOAST system.

🔖

Cite This Article

KUTLUK, M. K., ÖZTÜRK, V., AFŞAR, N., ERDEMOĞLU, A. K., KUNT, R., TİFTİKÇİOĞLU, B. İ., GEDİZLİOĞLU, M. (2022). Comparison of conventional and modern methods in determining ischemic stroke etiology by general and stroke neurologists. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 1, 170–177. https://ajindex.com/articles/610092

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Chen PH, Gao S, Wang YJ, Xu AD, Li YS, Wang D. Classifying ischemic stroke, from TOAST to CISS. CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics 2012; 18: 452-456
  2. Ay H. Etiologic classification in ischemic stroke. Turkish Journal of Neurology 2011; 17: 1-6
  3. Adams HP Jr, Bendixen BH, Kappelle LJ, Biller J, Love BB, Gordon DL, Marsh EE. Classification of subtype of acute ischemic stroke: definitions for use in a multicenter clinical trial. TOAST. Trial of Org 10172 in acute stroke treatment. Stroke 1993; 24: 35-41
  4. Ay H, Furie KL, Singhal A, Smith WS, Sorensen AG, Koroshetz WJ. An evidence-based causative classification system for acute ischemic stroke. Ann Neurol 2005; 58: 688-697
  5. Ay H, Benner T, Arsava EM, Furie KL, Singhal AB, Jensen MB, Ayata C, Towfighi A, Smith EE, Chong JY et al. A computerized algorithm for etiologic classification of ischemic stroke: the causative classification of stroke system. Stroke 2007; 38: 2979- 2984
  6. Arsava EM, Ballabio E, Benner T, Cole JW, Delgado-Martinez MP, Dichgans M, Fazekas F, Furie KL, Illoh K, Jood K et al. The causative classification of stroke system: an international reliability and optimization study. Neurology 2010; 75: 1277- 1284
  7. McArdle PF, Kittner SJ, Ay H, Brown RD, Meschia JF, Rundek T, Wassertheil-Smoller S, Woo D, Andsberg G, Biffi A et al. Agreement between TOAST and CCS ischemic stroke classification: the NINDS SiGN study. Neurology 2014; 83: 1653-1660. 8. de Paiva Bezerra R, de Miranda Alves MA, Conforto AB, Rodrigues DLG, Silva GS. Etiological classification of stroke in patients with Chagas Disease using TOAST, Causative Classification System TOAST, and ASCOD Phenotyping. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2017; 26: 2864-2869
  8. Bogiatzi C, Wannarong T, McLeod AI, Heisel M, Hackam D, Spence JD. SPARKLE (subtypes of ischaemic stroke classification system), incorporating measurement of carotid plaque burden: a new validated tool for the classification of ischemic stroke subtypes. Neuroepidemiology 2014; 42: 243- 251
  9. Marnane M, Duggan CA, Sheehan OC, Merwick A, Hannon N, Curtin D, Harris D, Williams EB, Horgan G, Kyne L et al. Stroke subtype classification to mechanism-specific and undetermined categories by TOAST, A-S-C-O, and causative classification system: direct comparison in the North Dublin Population Stroke Study. Stroke 2010; 41: 1579-1586
  10. Desai JA, Abuzinadah AR, Imoukhuede O, Bernbaum ML, Modi J, Demchuk AM, Coutts SB. Etiologic classification of TIA and minor stroke by A-S-C-O and