The evolution of invasive cerebral vasospasm treatment in patients with spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage and delayed cerebral ischemia-continuous selective intracarotid nimodipine therapy in awake patients without sedation.

Cerebral vasospasm (CV) and delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) are major factors that limit good outcome in patients with spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). Continuous therapy with intra-arterial calcium channel blockers has been introduced as a new step in the invasive treatment cascade of CV and DCI. Sedation is routinely necessary for this procedure. We report about the feasibility to apply this therapy in awake compliant patients without intubation and sedation. Out of 67 patients with invasive endovascular treatment of cerebral vasospasm due to spontaneous SAH, 5 patients underwent continuous superselective intracarotid nimodipine therapy without intubation and sedation. Complications, neurological improvement, and outcome at discharge were summarized. Very good outcome was achieved in all 5 patients. The Barthel scale was 100 and the modified Rankin scale 0-1 in all cases at discharge. We found no severe complications and excellent neurological monitoring was possible in all cases due to patients' alert status. Symptoms of DCI resolved within 24 h in all 5 cases. We could demonstrate the feasibility and safety of selective intracarotid arterial nimodipine treatment in awake, compliant patients with spontaneous SAH and symptomatic CV and DCI. Using this method, an excellent monitoring of neurological function as well as early detection of other complications is possible. It might be an important step in the risk reduction of invasive CV therapy to improve the outcome with CV and DCI after SAH in selected patients.

Alcohol recovery and spirituality: strangers, friends, or partners?

Alcoholics Anonymous, with its steady but nonspecific promotion of belief in a higher power and its emphasis on the group process, long held a near-monopoly in the outpatient alcohol recovery field, but its hegemony has now been challenged by two very different perspectives. The first is a nonspiritual approach that emphasizes the individual's capability to find a personal pathway to sobriety, exemplified by Rational Recovery. The second is a faith-based method, built on a religious understanding of alcoholism, of which Celebrate Recovery is a prominent example, based upon Christianity. Most communities offer a variety of approaches, so clinicians who are aware of these differences are in a good position to help patients make intelligent choices among the competing recovery philosophies.