Non-aneurysmal spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage: perimesencephalic versus non-perimesencephalic. / Hemorragia subaracnóidea espontânea não aneurismática: perimesencefálica versus não perimesencefálica.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical evolution of perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage and non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage. METHODS: The study was conducted retrospectively in a tertiary hospital center in the north region of Portugal. Included patients had no identifiable cause for subarachnoid hemorrhage. Several epidemiologic, clinical and imaging aspects were statistically analyzed, taking into account the differences in perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage and non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients met the inclusion criteria (46.8% - perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage; 53.2% - non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage). Demographic and clinical background characteristics were similar in both groups. Complications were more frequent in patients with non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage - 84.8% of the patients had at least one complication versus 48.3% in perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage. Vasospasm, infection and hydrocephaly were the most common complications (each was detected more frequently in the non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage group than in perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage group). Two patients died, both had a non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage. The median inpatient time was longer in the non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage group (21 versus 14 days). No incidents of rebleeding were reported during the follow-up period (mean time of 15 ± 10.3 months). CONCLUSION: Perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage and non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage are two different entities that have different clinical outcomes, namely in terms of complication rate and median inpatient time. The management of these patients should respect this difference to improve treatment and optimize health care resources.

Hemorragia subaracnóidea espontânea não aneurismática: perimesencefálica versus não perimesencefálica / Non-aneurysmal spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage: perimesencephalic versus non-perimesencephalic

RESUMO Objetivo: Comparar a evolução clínica da hemorragia subaracnóidea perimesencefálica com a da hemorragia subaracnóidea não perimesencefálica. Métodos: Estudo retrospectivo, que incluiu pacientes portadores de hemorragia subaracnóidea sem causa conhecida em um hospital terciário localizado na região norte de Portugal. Os dados epidemiológicos, clínicos e de imagem foram analisados estatisticamente, levando em conta a divisão dos pacientes em duas categorias: hemorragia subaracnóidea perimesencefálica e hemorragia subaracnóidea não perimesencefálica. Resultados: Cumpriram os critérios de inclusão 62 pacientes, 46,8% deles com hemorragia subaracnóidea perimesencefálica e 53,2% com hemorragia subaracnóidea não perimesencefálica. As caraterísticas demográficas, assim como os antecedentes clínicos, foram similares entre os grupos. As complicações foram observadas mais comumente no grupo com hemorragia subaracnóidea não perimesencefálica, sendo que 84,8% desses pacientes tiveram, no mínimo, uma complicação, comparados a 48,3% dos pacientes com hemorragia subaracnóidea perimesencefálica. Vasoespasmo, infecções e hidrocefalia foram as complicações mais comuns - todas observadas mais frequentemente nos pacientes com hemorragia subaracnóidea não perimesencefálica. Dois pacientes vieram a falecer, ambos com hemorragia subaracnóidea não perimesencefálica. A mediana do tempo de permanência no hospital foi maior nos pacientes com hemorragia subaracnóidea não perimesencefálica (21 dias, em comparação aos 14 dias observados nos pacientes com hemorragia subaracnóidea perimesencefálica). Não se observaram recidivas de sangramento durante o acompanhamento (tempo médio de 15 ± 10,3 meses). Conclusão: As hemorragias subaracnóideas perimesencefálica e não perimesencefálica tiveram formas diferentes de evolução clínica, principalmente no que se referiu à taxa de complicações e ao tempo mediano de permanência no hospital. Assim, a abordagem dessas duas formas de hemorragia subaracnóidea deve ser distinta, tanto em busca de melhorar o tratamento dos pacientes quanto para obter um melhor aproveitamento dos recursos de saúde.

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the clinical evolution of perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage and non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage. Methods: The study was conducted retrospectively in a tertiary hospital center in the north region of Portugal. Included patients had no identifiable cause for subarachnoid hemorrhage. Several epidemiologic, clinical and imaging aspects were statistically analyzed, taking into account the differences in perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage and non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage. Results: Sixty-two patients met the inclusion criteria (46.8% - perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage; 53.2% - non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage). Demographic and clinical background characteristics were similar in both groups. Complications were more frequent in patients with non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage - 84.8% of the patients had at least one complication versus 48.3% in perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage. Vasospasm, infection and hydrocephaly were the most common complications (each was detected more frequently in the non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage group than in perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage group). Two patients died, both had a non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage. The median inpatient time was longer in the non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage group (21 versus 14 days). No incidents of rebleeding were reported during the follow-up period (mean time of 15 ± 10.3 months). Conclusion: Perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage and non-perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage are two different entities that have different clinical outcomes, namely in terms of complication rate and median inpatient time. The management of these patients should respect this difference to improve treatment and optimize health care resources.