External validation and comparison of MBE, EDEMA, and modified EDEMA scores for predicting malignant cerebral EDEMA in Chinese patients with large hemispheric infarction patients without revascularization

Abstract

BackgroundMalignant cerebral edema (MCE) is a severe condition characterized by rapid neurological deterioration and a potentially poor prognosis. Scoring systems including the malignant brain edema (MBE) score, Enhanced Detection of Edema in Malignant Anterior Circulation Stroke score (EDEMA), and modified EDEMA score, have been developed to predict MCE in patients with large hemispheric infarction (LHI). We aimed to externally validate and comparethe predictive efficacy of these scores in LHI patients within 48 h of onset and not undergoing reperfusion therapy. MethodsDemographic, clinical and radiological data were retrospectively collected from LHI patients within 48 h of onset and not receiving reperfusion therapy. Patients were divided into MCE and non-MCE group. The calibration, discrimination, and clinical practicability of the three scores were verified using Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and decision curve analysis (DCA), respectively. Finally, continuous net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) were applied to determine the discrimination performance of the three scores. ResultsA total of 314 patients were included in the study, with 122 cases being MCE patients. The Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test showed excellent fitting ability across the MBE (p = 0.36), EDEMA (p = 0.61), and modified EDEMA scores (p = 0.62) in our patients. The MBE, EDEMA, and modified EDEMA scores had the AUCs of 0.855 (95 % CI 0.818–0.898), 0.782 (95 % CI 0.727–0.837) and 0.878 (95 % CI 0.844–0.919) respectively. The MBE (NRI, 0.33; 95 % CI, 0.11–0.56, p = 0.003 and IDI, 0.11; 95 % CI, 0.03–0.18; p = 0.004) and modified EDEMA scores (NRI, 1.10; 95 % CI, 0.94–1.26; p < 0.001 and IDI, 0.17; 95 % CI, 0.13–0.20, p < 0.001) showed better performance than the EDEMA score. DCA demonstrated that the modified EDEMA score outperformed the other two scores, possessing heightened clinical usefulness. ConclusionsThe MBE, EDEMA, and modified EDEMA scores for predicting MCE are also applicable in non-revascularization LHI patients within 48 h of onset. Both the MBE and modified EDEMA scores demonstrated higher predictive validity as predictive tools for MCE in LHI patients than the EDEMA score. Furthermore, the modified EDEMA score could be a suitable prediction tool in Chinese patients for its excellent clinical utility.