4.5 Article

Effect of mannitol on regional cerebral blood flow in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES
Volume 224, Issue 1-2, Pages 19-22

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2004.05.019

Keywords

mannitol; regional cerebral blood flow; intracerebral hemorrhage

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: To evaluate the regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) changes following IV mannitol bolus in patients with intracerebral hemorhage (ICH). Methods: In a hospital based randomized placebo controlled study, 21 CT proven ICH patients with Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score of '5 or more were subjected to clinical evaluation including GCS and Canadian Neurological stroke (CNS) scale. Cranial SPECT study was undertaken before and 60 min after 20% mannitol 100 ml IV in 20 min or sham infusion. The SPECT images were semi-quantitively analyzed and asymmetry index of basal ganglia, frontal, parietal and occipital regions were calculated. Results: There were 12 patients in mannitol and nine in control group who were evenly matched for age, mean arterial blood pressure, GCS score and size of hematoma. Only one patient died in mannitol group. Following mannitol, GCS score improved in six, worsened in two and remained unaltered in four patients. In the control group, GCS improved in seven, worsened in none and was unchanged in two patents. SPECT studies revealed reduction in asymmetry index in basal ganglia in four, frontal region in six, parietal in four and occipital region in five patients in mannitol group. In control group, asymmetry index was reduced in basal ganglia in one, frontal and parietal region in three each and occipital region in five patients. These differences between control and study group were not significant. Conclusion: Mannitol does not seem to significantly change the regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) in ICH patients as evaluated by SPECT study. (C)2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available