4.6 Article

Acute physiological derangement is associated with early radiographic cerebral infarction after subarachnoid haemorrhage

期刊

出版社

B M J PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.2006.089748

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Cerebral infarction after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) is presumed to be due to cerebral vasospasm, defined as arterial lumen narrowing from days 3 to 14. Methods: We reviewed the computed tomography scans of 103 patients with aneurysmal SAH for radiographic cerebral infarction and controlled for other predictors of outcome. A blinded neuroradiologist reviewed the angiograms. Cerebral infarction from vasospasm was judged to be unlikely if it was visible on computed tomography within 2 calendar days of SAH or if angiography showed no vasospasm in a referable vessel, or both. Results: Cerebral infarction occurred in 29 (28%) of 103 patients with SAH. 18 patients had cerebral infarction that was unlikely to be due to vasospasm because it was visible on computed tomography by day 2 (6 (33%)) or because angiography showed no vasospasm in a referable artery (7 (39%)), or both (5 (28%)). In a multivariate model, cerebral infarction was significantly related to World Federation of Neurologic Surgeons grade (odds ratio (OR) 1.5/ grade, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 2.01, p = 0.006) and SAH-Physiologic Derangement Score (PDS) > 2 (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.4 to 9.8, p = 0.01) on admission. Global cerebral oedema (OR 4.3, 95% CI 1.5 to 12.5, p = 0.007) predicted cerebral infarction. Patients with cerebral infarction detectable by day 2 had a higher SAH-PDS than patients with later cerebral infarction (p = 0.025). Conclusions : Many cerebral infarctions after SAH are unlikely to be caused by vasospasm because they occur too soon after SAH or because angiography shows no vasospasm in a referable artery, or both. Physiological derangement and cerebral oedema may be worthwhile targets for intervention to decrease the occurrence and clinical impact of cerebral infarction after SAH.

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