Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 691

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

CT Angiography “Spot Sign” Predicts Hematoma Expansion in Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Open access
Wada, Ryan, Aviv, Richard I., Fox, Allan J., Sahlas, Demetrios J., Gladstone, David J., Tomlinson, George, Symons, Sean P.·2007·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose— Morbidity and mortality in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) are correlated with hematoma progression. We hypothesized that the presence of tiny, enhancing foci (“spot sign”) within acute hematomas is associated with hematoma expansion. Methods— We prospectively studied 39 consecutive patients with spontaneous ICH by computed tomography angiography within 3 hours of symptom onset. Scans were reviewed by 3 readers. Patients were dichotomized according to the presence or absence of the spot sign. Clinical and radiological outcomes were compared between groups. The predictive value of this sign was assessed in a multivariate analysis. Results— Thirteen patients (33%) demonstrated 31 enhancing foci. Baseline clinical variables were similar in both groups. Hematoma expansion occurred in 11 patients (28%) on follow-up. Seventy-seven percent of patients with and 4% without hematoma expansion demonstrated the spot sign ( P <0.0001). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and likelihood ratio for expansion were 91%, 89%, 77%, 96%, and 8.5, respectively. Interobserver agreement was high (κ=0.92 to 0.94). In patients with the spot sign, mean volume change was greater ( P =0.008), extravasation more common ( P =0.0005), and median hospital stay longer ( P =0.04), and fewer patients achieved a good outcome (modified Rankin Scale score <2), although the latter was not significant ( P =0.16). No differences in hydrocephalus ( P =1.00), surgical intervention ( P =1.00), or death ( P =0.60) were noted between groups. In multiple regression, the spot sign independently predicted hematoma expansion ( P =0.0003). Conclusions— The computed tomography angiography spot sign is associated with the presence and extent of hematoma progression. Fewer patients achieve a good clinical outcome and hospital stay was longer. Further studies are warranted to validate the ability of this sign to predict clinical outcomes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.str.0000259633.59404.f3

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 691

Metadata

Authors
Wada, R., Aviv, R. I., Fox, A. J., Sahlas, D. J., Gladstone, D. J., Tomlinson, G., & Symons, S. P.
Venue
Stroke
Published
2007-04
Volume
38
Issue
4
Pages
1257-1262
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2107281754
Cited by
691
References
1
FWCI
15.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: CT Angiography “Spot Sign” Predicts Hematoma Expansion in Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.str.0000259633.59404.f3
The paper
Wada, R., Aviv, R. I., Fox, A. J., Sahlas, D. J., Gladstone, D. J., Tomlinson, G., & Symons, S. P. (2007). CT Angiography “Spot Sign” Predicts Hematoma Expansion in Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.0000259633.59404.f3

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.