4.6 Review

Intracerebral Hemorrhage Genetics

Journal

GENES
Volume 13, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/genes13071250

Keywords

hemorrhagic stroke genetics; intracerebral hemorrhage; single nucleotide polymorphism; genetic stroke causes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is a devastating type of stroke with unfavorable functional outcomes. Timely prevention and optimized treatment strategies are crucial given the burden of ICH. Genetic factors play a significant role in the pathogenesis of ICH, with various gene-related types identified. Although current data is mostly theoretical and scientific, emerging evidence holds promise for future clinical applications.
Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is a devastating type of stroke, frequently resulting in unfavorable functional outcomes. Up to 15% of stroke patients experience ICH and approximately half of those have a lethal outcome within a year. Considering the huge burden of ICH, timely prevention and optimized treatment strategies are particularly relevant. Nevertheless, ICH management options are quite limited, despite thorough research. More and more trials highlight the importance of the genetic component in the pathogenesis of ICH. Apart from distinct monogenic disorders of familial character, mostly occurring in younger subjects, there are numerous polygenic risk factors, such as hypertension, neurovascular inflammation, disorders of lipid metabolism and coagulation cascade, and small vessel disease. In this paper we describe gene-related ICH types and underlying mechanisms. We also briefly discuss the emerging treatment options and possible clinical relevance of the genetic findings in ICH management. Although existing data seems of more theoretical and scientific value so far, a growing body of evidence, combined with rapidly evolving experimental research, will probably serve clinicians in the future.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available