Cerebral misery perfusion diagnosed using hypercapnic blood-oxygenation-level-dependent contrast functional magnetic resonance imaging: a case report

Introduction Cerebral misery perfusion represents a failure of cerebral autoregulation. It is animportant differential diagnosis in post-stroke patients presenting with collapses in the presence of haemodynamically significant cerebrovascular stenosis. This is particularly the case when cortical or internal watershed infarcts are present. When this condition occurs, further investigation should be done immediately. Case presentation A 50-year-old Caucasian man presented with a stroke secondary to complete occlusion of his left internal carotid artery. He went on to suffer recurrent seizures. Neuroimaging demonstrated numerous new watershed-territory cerebral infarcts. No source of arterial thromboembolism was demonstrable. Hypercapnic blood-oxygenation-level-dependent-contrast functional magnetic resonance imaging was used to measure his cerebrovascular reserve capacity. The findings were suggestive of cerebral misery perfusion. Conclusions Blood-oxygenation-level-dependent-contrast functional magnetic resonance imaging allows the inference of cerebral misery perfusion. This procedure is cheaper and more readily available than positron emission tomography imaging, which is the current gold standard diagnostic test. The most evaluated treatment for cerebral misery perfusion is extracranial-intracranial bypass. Although previous trials of this have been unfavourable, the results of new studies involving extracranial-intracranial bypass in high-risk patients identified during cerebral perfusion imaging are awaited. Cerebral misery perfusion is an important and under-recognized condition in which emerging imaging and treatment modalities present the possibility of practical and evidence-based management in the near future. Physicians should thus be aware of this disorder and of recent developments in diagnostic tests that allow its detection.

Use of posterior predictive assessments to evaluate model fit in multilevel logistic regression

Assessing the fit of a model is an important final step in any statistical analysis, but this is not straightforward when complex discrete response models are used. Cross validation and posterior predictions have been suggested as methods to aid model criticism. In this paper a comparison is made between four methods of model predictive assessment in the context of a three level logistic regression model for clinical mastitis in dairy cattle; cross validation, a prediction using the full posterior predictive distribution and two “mixed” predictive methods that incorporate higher level random effects simulated from the underlying model distribution. Cross validation is considered a gold standard method but is computationally intensive and thus a comparison is made between posterior predictive assessments and cross validation. The analyses revealed that mixed prediction methods produced results close to cross validation whilst the full posterior predictive assessment gave predictions that were over-optimistic (closer to the observed disease rates) compared with cross validation. A mixed prediction method that simulated random effects from both higher levels was best at identifying the outlying level two (farm-year) units of interest. It is concluded that this mixed prediction method, simulating random effects from both higher levels, is straightforward and may be of value in model criticism of multilevel logistic regression, a technique commonly used for animal health data with a hierarchical structure.