Risk of intracranial hemorrhage in brain arteriovenous malformations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Brain arteriovenous malformations (bAVMs) carry a risk of hemorrhage. We aim to identify factors associated with subsequent hemorrhages. METHODS: Systematic searches were conducted across the ScienceDirect, Medline, and Cochrane databases. Assessed risk factors included bAVM size, bAVM volume, hemorrhage and seizure presentations, presence of deep venous drainage, deep-seated bAVMs, associated aneurysms, and Spetzler-Martin grade. Subgroup analyses were conducted on prior treatments, hemorrhage presentation, AVM size, and type of management. RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 8 cohort studies and 2 trials, with 4,240 participants. Initial hemorrhage presentation (HR 2.41; 95% CI 1.94-2.98; p < 0.001), any deep venous drainage (HR 1.52; 95% CI 1.09-2.13; p = 0.01), and associated aneurysms (HR 1.78; 95% CI 1.41-2.23; p < 0.001) increased secondary hemorrhage risk. Conversely, higher Spetzler-Martin grades (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.68-0.87; p < 0.001) and larger malformation volumes (HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.76-0.99; p = 0.04) reduced risk. Subgroups showed any deep venous drainage in patients without prior treatment (HR 1.64; 95% CI 1.25-2.15; p < 0.001), bAVM > 3 cm (HR 1.79; 95% CI 1.15-2.78; p = 0.01), and multimodal interventions (HR 1.69; 95% CI 1.12-2.53; p = 0.01) increased risk. The reverse effect was found for patients initially presented without hemorrhage (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.67-0.93; p = 0.01). Deep bAVM was a risk factor in > 3 cm cases (HR 2.72; 95% CI 1.61-4.59; p < 0.001) and multimodal management (HR 2.77; 95% CI 1.66-4.56; p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed increased hemorrhage risk for initial hemorrhage presentation, while cumulative survival was higher in intervened patients over 72 months. CONCLUSION: Significant risk factors for bAVMs hemorrhage include initial hemorrhage, any deep venous drainage, and associated aneurysms. Deep venous drainage involvement is a risk factor in cases without prior treatment, those with bAVM > 3 cm, and cases managed with multimodal interventions. Deep bAVM involvement also emerges as a risk factor in cases > 3 cm and those managed with multimodal approaches.

Effectivity and safety of endovascular coiling versus microsurgical clipping for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing lack of consensus among clinicians regarding on the optimal aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) management approach between endovascular coiling and microsurgical clipping. METHODS: Comprehensive literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted in Medline and Cochrane databases until January 1st, 2023 without language constraints. Effectivity outcomes included one-year mortality, one-year poor outcomes, and one-year complete aneurysmal occlusion, while safety outcomes comprised the incidence of vasospasms, rebleeding, post-operative complications, and cerebral ischemia. RESULTS: Eight RCTs, involving 3585 aSAH patients, underwent comprehensive quantitative analysis. Among them, 1792 underwent endovascular coiling and 1773 patients had microsurgical clipping. Regarding effectivity, the rates of one-year mortality (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.61-1.03, p = 0.08) exhibited no significant difference. However, endovascular coiling demonstrated an inferior one-year complete aneurysmal occlusion rate (OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.21-0.53, p < 0.00001), although with significantly lower rates of poor outcomes (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.57-0.81, p < 0.00001) compared to the microsurgical clipping group. As for safety, endovascular coiling group exhibited lower rates of vasospasm (OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.36-0.92, p = 0.02), post-operative complications (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.23-0.71, p = 0.02), and cerebral ischemia (OR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.20-0.63, p = 0.0004). No significant effect on the incidence of rebleeding was observed (OR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.73-1.63, p = 0.68). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular coiling proves superior and safer for aSAH patients, but consideration of resources, patient condition, and surgeon preferences is crucial for selecting the optimal approach.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Acute Ischemic Stroke.

Ischemic stroke is one of the leading causes of mortality and disability. The only effective non-surgical treatment for acute ischemic stroke within three to four and a half hours of the onset of symptoms is thrombolytic therapy. Time is of the essence when diagnosing and treating an acute ischemic stroke. After evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of thrombolysis, selecting the ideal patient for the indication is essential. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is more sensitive and specific than Computed Tomography (CT) scans when identifying acute ischemic stroke. In approximately 80% of cases, infarcts are detectable within the first 24 hours. MRI can detect an ischemic stroke within a few hours of its onset. Multimodal imaging provides information for the diagnosis of ischemic stroke, patient selection for thrombolytic therapy, and prognosis estimation.

Modified ICH score was superior to original ICH score for assessment of 30-day mortality and good outcome of non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage.

INTRODUCTION: Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) score has been widely used as a consistent and reliable clinical grading scale for predicting mortality. However, ICH score had not been used to predict good outcome or significant disability for those who were alive. We intended to address whether any modifications would increase prediction accuracy for mortality as well as the extent of morbidity for those who survived. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study, involving all non-traumatic ICH patients admitted to our hospital between September 2018 and July 2020. All non-traumatic ICH patients who were admitted to the stroke unit and registered in our stroke database had their medical records, neuroimaging, and laboratory test results reviewed. Only patients with complete medical records and available CT imaging and laboratory test results were included in our study. Independent predictors of mortality (modified Rankin scale/mRS of 6) or good outcome vs. significant disability (mRS≤2 vs. mRS 3-5, respectively) were identified by logistic regression. A modified ICH (mICH) score was compared with the original ICH (oICH) score for its diagnostic performance (DP). Overall DPs were graded and ranked according to Youden Index (YI). RESULTS: As many as 311 patients were eligible with both 39.9% rate of 30-day mortality and good outcome. Factors independently associated with mortality were low GCS and high NIHSS on admission (P = 0.002, <0.001, respectively), and presence of respiratory failure (P < 0.001). Independent factors for good outcome were low NIHSS on admission and mass effect (midline shift > 5 mm) [both P < 0.001]. A modification of ICH score from the original was made by substituting GCS with NIHSS (0 -10 = 1; 11 - 20 = 2; >20 = 3), changing age cut-off point to > 55 years old (= 1), and adding respiratory failure (= 1), and mass effect (= 1). Overall, mICH scored better over oICH score with respect to sensitivity and had comparable specificity for both 30-day mortality and good outcome (sensitivity 80.6% vs. 50.8%; specificity 88.7% vs. 89.3%; YI 0.69 vs. 0.40, respectively) and good outcome (sensitivity 86.3% vs. 77.4%; specificity 74.6% vs. 77.8%; YI of 0.61 vs. 0.55, respectively). There was only one patient with oICH and none on mICH score of 0, who died and none survived with oICH and mICH score of ≥ 5 and ≥ 7, respectively. The proportion of 30-day mortality and good outcome increased in a more linear fashion with mICH score. CONCLUSIONS: The mICH score was proven to be reliable and consistent as a risk grading assessment for non-traumatic ICH patients. The mICH was statistically superior to oICH score in predicting 30-day mortality and good outcome.

Case reports of cerebral sinus venous thrombosis in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has started in December 2019 and still ongoing. The disease has been expanding rapidly with a high variety of phenotypes from asymptomatic, mild respiratory tract infection, multiple organ system dysfunction, and death. Neurological manifestations also appear in patients with COVID-19, such as headache, seizures, a decrease of consciousness, and paralysis. The hypercoagulable state in patients with COVID-19 is associated with the thromboembolic incident including ischemic strokes, venous thromboembolism, pulmonary artery embolism, and many further. Cerebral sinus venous thrombosis (CSVT) is a rare neurovascular emergency that is often found in critically ill patients. We report two cases of CSVT with different onsets, neurologic manifestations, and prognoses. CASE PRESENTATION: Two cases of cerebral sinus venous thrombosis in COVID-19 patients were reported, following respiratory, hematology, and coagulation disarrangements, which was triggered by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The first patient, which was presented with a seizure, had hypertension and diabetes mellitus as comorbidities. The latter case had no comorbidity but showed more severe presentations of COVID-19 such as brain and lung thrombosis, although already had several days of intravenous anticoagulant administrations. These two cases also have a different course of disease and outcomes, which were interesting topics to study. CONCLUSIONS: CSVT is one of the neurological complications of the COVID-19 when the brainstem venous drainage is involved. Despite successful alteration to the negative result of SARS-CoV-2 through the rt-PCR test, thrombogenesis and coagulation cascade continuing. Therefore, a high level of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), D-dimer, fibrinogen, and C-reactive protein (CRP) are paramount indicators of poor prognosis.

Pathomechanism and Management of Stroke in COVID-19: Review of Immunopathogenesis, Coagulopathy, Endothelial Dysfunction, and Downregulation of ACE2.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can reportedly manifest as an acute stroke, with most cases presenting as large vessel ischemic stroke in patients with or without comorbidities. The exact pathomechanism of stroke in COVID-19 remains ambiguous. The findings of previous studies indicate that the most likely underlying mechanisms are cerebrovascular pathological conditions following viral infection, inflammation-induced endothelial dysfunction, and hypercoagulability. Acute endothelial damage due to inflammation triggers a coagulation cascade, thrombosis propagation, and destabilization of atherosclerosis plaques, leading to large-vessel occlusion and plaque ulceration with concomitant thromboemboli, and manifests as ischemic stroke. Another possible mechanism is the downregulation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 as the target action of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Acute stroke management protocols need to be modified during the COVID-19 pandemic in order to adequately manage stroke patients with COVID-19.