Functional Outcomes in Conservatively vs Surgically Treated Cerebellar Infarcts.

Importance: According to the current American Heart Association/American Stroke Association guidelines, decompressive surgery is indicated in patients with cerebellar infarcts that demonstrate severe cerebellar swelling. However, there is no universal definition of swelling and/or infarct volume(s) available to support a decision for surgery. Objective: To evaluate functional outcomes in surgically compared with conservatively managed patients with cerebellar infarcts. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, patients with cerebellar infarcts treated at 5 tertiary referral hospitals or stroke centers within Germany between 2008 and 2021 were included. Data were analyzed from November 2020 to November 2023. Exposures: Surgical treatment (ie, posterior fossa decompression plus standard of care) vs conservative management (ie, medical standard of care). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome examined was functional status evaluated by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at discharge and 1-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the predicted probabilities for favorable outcome (mRS score of 0 to 3) stratified by infarct volumes or Glasgow Coma Scale score at admission and treatment modality. Analyses included propensity score matching, with adjustments for age, sex, Glasgow Coma Scale score at admission, brainstem involvement, and infarct volume. Results: Of 531 included patients with cerebellar infarcts, 301 (57%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 68 (14.4) years. After propensity score matching, a total of 71 patients received surgical treatment and 71 patients conservative treatment. There was no significant difference in favorable outcomes (ie, mRS score of 0 to 3) at discharge for those treated surgically vs conservatively (47 [66%] vs 45 [65%]; odds ratio, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.5-2.2; P > .99) or at follow-up (35 [73%] vs 33 [61%]; odds ratio, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.7-4.2; P > .99). In patients with cerebellar infarct volumes of 35 mL or greater, surgical treatment was associated with a significant improvement in favorable outcomes at 1-year follow-up (38 [61%] vs 3 [25%]; odds ratio, 4.8; 95% CI, 1.2-19.3; P = .03), while conservative treatment was associated with favorable outcomes at 1-year follow-up in patients with infarct volumes of less than 25 mL (2 [34%] vs 218 [74%]; odds ratio, 0.2; 95% CI, 0-1.0; P = .047). Conclusions and Relevance: Overall, surgery was not associated with improved outcomes compared with conservative management in patients with cerebellar infarcts. However, when stratifying based on infarct volume, surgical treatment appeared to be beneficial in patients with larger infarct volumes, while conservative management appeared favorable in patients with smaller infarct volumes.

Necrosectomy Versus Stand-Alone Suboccipital Decompressive Craniectomy for the Management of Space-Occupying Cerebellar Infarctions-A Retrospective Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Space-occupying cerebellar stroke (SOCS) when coupled with neurological deterioration represents a neurosurgical emergency. Although current evidence supports surgical intervention in such patients with SOCS and rapid neurological deterioration, the optimal surgical methods/techniques to be applied remain a matter of debate. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, multicenter study of patients undergoing surgery for SOCS. Patients were stratified according to the type of surgery as (1) suboccipital decompressive craniectomy (SDC) or (2) suboccipital craniotomy with concurrent necrosectomy. The primary end point examined was functional outcome using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at discharge and at 3 months (mRS 0-3 defined as favorable and mRS 4-6 as unfavorable outcome). Secondary end points included the analysis of in-house postoperative complications, mortality, and length of hospitalization. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients were included in the final analysis: 49 underwent necrosectomy and 43 underwent SDC. Those with necrosectomy displayed significantly higher rate of favorable outcome at discharge as compared with those who underwent SDC alone: 65.3% vs 27.9%, respectively ( P < .001, odds ratios 4.9, 95% CI 2.0-11.8). This difference was also observed at 3 months: 65.3% vs 41.7% ( P = .030, odds ratios 2.7, 95% CI 1.1-6.7). No significant differences were observed in mortality and/or postoperative complications, such as hemorrhagic transformation, infection, and/or the development of cerebrospinal fluid leaks/fistulas. CONCLUSION: In the setting of SOCS, patients treated with necrosectomy displayed better functional outcomes than those patients who underwent SDC alone. Ultimately, prospective, randomized studies will be needed to confirm this finding.

Cerebellar Stroke Score and Grading Scale for the Prediction of Mortality and Outcomes in Ischemic Cerebellar Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Several individual predictors for outcomes in patients with cerebellar stroke (CS) have been previously identified. There is, however, no established clinical score for CS. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop simple and accurate grading scales for patients with CS in an effort to better estimate mortality and outcomes. METHODS: This multicentric retrospective study included 531 patients with ischemic CS presenting to 5 different academic neurosurgical and neurological departments throughout Germany between 2008 and 2021. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine independent predictors related to 30-day mortality and unfavorable outcome (modified Rankin Scale score of 4-6). By weighing each parameter via calculation of regression coefficients, an ischemic CS-score and CS-grading scale (CS-GS) were developed and internally validated. RESULTS: Independent predictors for 30-day mortality were aged ≥70 years (odds ratio, 5.2), Glasgow Coma Scale score 3 to 4 at admission (odds ratio, 2.6), stroke volume ≥25 cm3 (odds ratio, 2.7), and involvement of the brain stem (odds ratio, 3.9). When integrating each parameter into the CS-score, age≥70 years and brain stem stroke were assigned 2 points, Glasgow Coma Scale score 3 to 4, and stroke volume≥25 cm3 1 point resulting in a score ranging from 0 to 6. CS-score of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 points resulted in 30-day mortality of 1%, 6%, 6%, 17%, 21%, 55%, and 67%, respectively. Independent predictors for 30-day unfavorable outcomes consisted of all components of the CS-score with an additional variable focused on comorbidities (CS-GS). Except for Glasgow Coma Scale score 3 to 4 at admission, which was assigned 3 points, all other parameters were assigned 1 point resulting in an overall score ranging from 0 to 7. CS-GS of 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 points resulted in 30-day unfavorable outcome of 1%, 17%, 33%, 40%, 50%, 80%, 77%, and 100%, respectively. Both 30-day mortality and unfavorable outcomes increased with increasing CS-score and CS-GS (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The CS-score and CS-GS are simple and accurate grading scales for the prediction of 30-day mortality and unfavorable outcome in patients with CS. While the score systems proposed here may not directly impact treatment decisions, it may help discuss mortality and outcome with patients and caregivers.