4.6 Review

Review of studies on dynamic cerebral autoregulation in the acute phase of stroke and the relationship with clinical outcome

期刊

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0271678X211045222

关键词

Ischemic stroke; dynamic cerebral autoregulation; cerebral perfusion; clinical outcome; INFOMATAS

资金

  1. NIHR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Acute stroke is a serious condition with high morbidity and mortality rates. Research has been conducted on new therapies to improve clinical outcomes post stroke onset, but challenges remain. Additional treatments targeted to individual patients are needed for better results.
Acute stroke is associated with high morbidity and mortality. In the last decades, new therapies have been investigated with the aim of improving clinical outcomes in the acute phase post stroke onset. However, despite such advances, a large number of patients do not demonstrate improvement, furthermore, some unfortunately deteriorate. Thus, there is a need for additional treatments targeted to the individual patient. A potential therapeutic target is interventions to optimize cerebral perfusion guided by cerebral hemodynamic parameters such as dynamic cerebral autoregulation (dCA). This narrative led to the development of the INFOMATAS (Identifying New targets FOr Management And Therapy in Acute Stroke) project, designed to foster interventions directed towards understanding and improving hemodynamic aspects of the cerebral circulation in acute cerebrovascular disease states. This comprehensive review aims to summarize relevant studies on assessing dCA in patients suffering acute ischemic stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage, and subarachnoid haemorrhage. The review will provide to the reader the most consistent findings, the inconsistent findings which still need to be explored further and discuss the main limitations of these studies. This will allow for the creation of a research agenda for the use of bedside dCA information for prognostication and targeted perfusion interventions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据