| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Compter, A., et al.
(author)
-
Determinants and outcome of multiple and early recurrent cervical artery dissections
- 2018
-
In: Neurology. ; 91:8
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective To assess putative risk factors and outcome of multiple and early recurrent cervical artery dissection (CeAD). Methods We combined data from 2 multicenter cohorts and compared patients with multiple CeAD at initial diagnosis, early recurrent CeAD within 3 to 6 months, and single nonrecurrent CeAD. Putative risk factors, clinical characteristics, functional outcome, and risk of recurrent ischemic events were assessed. Results Of 1,958 patients with CeAD (mean ± SD age 44.3 ± 10 years, 43.9% women), 1,588 (81.1%) had single nonrecurrent CeAD, 340 (17.4%) had multiple CeAD, and 30 (1.5%) presented with single CeAD at admission and had early recurrent CeAD. Patients with multiple or early recurrent CeAD did not significantly differ with respect to putative risk factors, clinical presentation, and outcome. In multivariable analyses, patients with multiple or early recurrent CeAD more often had recent infection (odds ratio [OR] 1.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29–2.53), vertebral artery dissection (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.34–2.46), family history of stroke (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.06–2.25), cervical pain (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.01–1.84), and subarachnoid hemorrhage (OR 2.85, 95% CI 1.01–8.04) at initial presentation compared to patients with single nonrecurrent CeAD. Patients with multiple or early recurrent CeAD also had a higher incidence of cerebral ischemia (hazard ratio 2.77, 95% CI 1.49–5.14) at 3 to 6 months but no difference in functional outcome compared to patients with single nonrecurrent CeAD. Conclusion Patients with multiple and early recurrent CeAD share similar risk factors, clinical characteristics, and functional outcome. Compared to patients with single nonrecurrent CeAD, they are more likely to have recurrent cerebral ischemia at 3 to 6 months, possibly reflecting an underlying transient vasculopathy.
|
|
| 10. |
- Kahles, T., et al.
(author)
-
Repeated Intravenous Thrombolysis for Early Recurrent Stroke Challenging the Exclusion Criterion
- 2016
-
In: Stroke. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 0039-2499 .- 1524-4628. ; 47:8, s. 2133-2135
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background and Purpose-Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) within 4.5 hours from symptom onset improves functional outcome in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Its use in patients with previous stroke within the preceding 3 months is contraindicated because of the assumed higher risk of intracranial hemorrhage. In addition, tissue-type plasminogen activator may itself promote neurotoxicity and blood-brain barrier disruption. However, safety and effectiveness of repeated IVT is essentially unknown in patients with early (<3 months) recurrent stroke (ERS), because they were excluded from thrombolysis trials. This article reports the largest case series of repeated IVT in ERS. Methods-We reviewed databases of prospectively collected patient data of 8 European stroke centers for the presence of patients with ERS, who received IVT for both the index stroke and ERS. Demographics, clinical and radiological data, bleeding complications, and functional outcome were analyzed. Results-We identified 19 subjects with repeated IVT in ERS. Mean age was 68 +/- 12 years, and 37% of them were female. Median interthrombolysis interval was 30 days (interquartile range, 13-50). Functional independence (modified Rankin scale score <= 2) was achieved in 79% of patients after the first and in 47.4% after repeated IV tissue-type plasminogen activator, respectively. There was no symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Median final infarct volume after the first IVT was 1.5 cm(3) (interquartile range, 0.5-3.1). Conclusions-Patients with small infarct volumes and robust clinical improvement might be considered for repeated IVT within 3 months. Studies following strict protocols and larger registries incorporating these patients might serve to identify selection criteria for the safe use of repeated IVT in ERS.
|
|
