Carotid Revascularization and Its Effect on Cognitive Function: A Prospective Nonrandomized Multicenter Clinical Study

© 2020 The Author(s) Background: There is conflicting data on the effect of carotid revascularization on cognitive function. Objective: To examine cerebral blood flow and cognitive function after carotid revascularization. Methods: Patients with unilateral, asymptomatic hemodynamically significant carotid artery stenosis (80% by computed tomography angiography or magnetic resonance angiography) were eligible. Cerebral blood flow was measured preoperatively and 1 month postoperatively using quantitative phase contrast magnetic resonance angiography. Preoperative flow impairment was defined as ipsilateral flow at least 20% less than contralateral flow (ie, an ipsilateral and/or contralateral flow ratio ≤0.8). Significant improvement in blood flow was defined as at least a 0.15 increase in flow ratio from pre- to postoperative. A control group was managed medically. Four cognitive domains were assessed at baseline, 1 month, and 6-12 months postoperatively. Results: Seventy-five patients were enrolled at 6 sites; 53 carotid endarterectomy, 11 carotid artery stenting, and 11 medical management only controls. Preoperative Trails B scores were similar between groups. Revascularization was associated with significant improvement in executive function (Trials B) while no improvement was observed in controls (P = .007). Of patients with improvement in middle cerebral artery (MCA) flow, 90% had improved Trails B scores compared to 46.5% of patients without MCA flow improvement (P = .01). Greater absolute improvement in mean Trails B scores was observed in patients with MCA flow improvement compared to those without (48 seconds versus 24.7 seconds, P = .001). Conclusions: In a cohort of patient with asymptomatic carotid stenosis, improvement in MCA flow following carotid revascularization is associated with improvement in executive functioning

Submaximal Angioplasty for Symptomatic Intracranial Atherosclerotic Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Peri-Procedural and Long-Term Risk

© 2019 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons. BACKGROUND: Symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) is an important cause of stroke. Although the high periprocedural risk of intracranial stenting from recent randomized studies has dampened enthusiasm for such interventions, submaximal angioplasty without stenting may represent a safer endovascular treatment option. OBJECTIVE: To examine the periprocedural and long-term risks associated with submaximal angioplasty for ICAD based on the available literature. METHODS: All English language studies of intracranial angioplasty for ICAD were screened. Inclusion criteria were as follows: ≥ 5 patients, intervention with submaximal angioplasty alone, and identifiable periprocedural (30-d) outcomes. Analysis was co-nducted to identify the following: 1) periprocedural risk of any stroke (ischemic or hemorrh-agic) or death, and 2) stroke in the territory of the target vessel and fatal stroke beyond 30 d. Mixed effects logistic regression was used to summarize event rates. Funnel plot and rank correlation tests were employed to detect publication bias. The relative risk of periprocedural events from anterior vs posterior circulation disease intervention was also examined. RESULTS: A total of 9 studies with 408 interventions in 395 patients met inclusion criteria. Six of these studies included 113 posterior circulation interventions. The estimated pooled rate for 30-d stroke or death following submaximal angioplasty was 4.9% (95% CI: 3.2%-7.5%), whereas the estimated pooled rate beyond 30 d was 3.7% (95% CI: 2.2%-6.0%). There was no statistical difference in estimated pooled rate for 30-d stroke or death between patients with anterior (4.8%, 95% CI: 2.8%-7.9%) vs posterior (5.3%, 95% CI: 2.4%-11.3%) circulation disease (P \u3e. 99). CONCLUSION: Submaximal angioplasty represents a potentially promising intervention for symptomatic ICAD

Outcomes Associated With Intracranial Aneurysm Treatments Reported as Safe, Effective, or Durable:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance: Testing new medical devices or procedures in terms of safety, effectiveness, and durability should follow the strictest methodological rigor before implementation. Objectives: To review and analyze studies investigating devices and procedures used in intracranial aneurysm (IA) treatment for methods and completeness of reporting and to compare the results of studies with positive, uncertain, and negative conclusions. Data Sources: Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials were searched for studies on IA treatment published between January 1, 1995, and the October 1, 2022. Grey literature was retrieved from Google Scholar. Study Selection: All studies making any kind of claims of safety, effectiveness, or durability in the field of IA treatment were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Using a predefined data dictionary and analysis plan, variables ranging from patient and aneurysm characteristics to the results of treatment were extracted, as were details pertaining to study methods and completeness of reporting. Extraction was performed by 10 independent reviewers. A blinded academic neuro-linguist without involvement in IA research evaluated the conclusion of each study as either positive, uncertain, or negative. The study followed Preferring Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: The incidence of domain-specific outcomes between studies with positive, uncertain, or negative conclusions regarding safety, effectiveness, or durability were compared. The number of studies that provided a definition of safety, effectiveness, or durability and the incidence of incomplete reporting of domain-specific outcomes were evaluated.Results: Overall, 12 954 studies were screened, and 1356 studies were included, comprising a total of 410 993 treated patients. There was no difference in the proportion of patients with poor outcome or in-hospital mortality between studies claiming a technique was safe, uncertain, or not safe. Similarly, there was no difference in the proportion of IAs completely occluded at last follow-up between studies claiming a technique was effective, uncertain, or noneffective. Less than 2% of studies provided any definition of safety, effectiveness, or durability, and only 1 of the 1356 studies provided a threshold under which the technique would be considered unsafe. Incomplete reporting was found in 546 reports (40%).Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of IA treatment literature, studies claiming safety, effectiveness, or durability of IA treatment had methodological flaws and incomplete reporting of relevant outcomes supporting these claims.</p

Rising statin use and effect on ischemic stroke outcome

BACKGROUND: Statins (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors) have neuroprotective effects in experimental stroke models and are commonly prescribed in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to determine if patients taking statins before hospital admission for stroke had an improved clinical outcome. METHODS: This was an observational study of 436 patients admitted to the National Institutes of Health Suburban Hospital Stroke Program between July 2000 and December 2002. Self-reported risk factors for stroke were obtained on admission. Stroke severity was determined by the admission National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score. Good outcome was defined as a Rankin score < 2 at discharge. Statistical analyses used univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: There were 436 patients with a final diagnosis of ischemic stroke; statin data were available for 433 of them. A total of 95/433 (22%) of patients were taking a statin when they were admitted, rising from 16% in 2000 to 26% in 2002. Fifty-one percent of patients taking statins had a good outcome compared to 38% of patients not taking statins (p = 0.03). After adjustment for confounding factors, statin pretreatment was associated with a 2.9 odds (95% CI: 1.2–6.7) of a good outcome at the time of hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of patients taking statins when they are admitted with stroke is rising rapidly. Statin pretreatment was significantly associated with an improved functional outcome at discharge. This finding could support the early initiation of statin therapy after stroke

Cerebral Bypass Surgery: Level of Evidence and Grade of Recommendation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS Cerebral bypasses are categorized according to function (flow augmentation or flow preservation) and to characteristics: direct, indirect or combined bypass, extra-to-intracranial or intra-to-intracranial bypass, and high-, moderate- or low-capacity bypass. We critically summarize the current state of evidence and grades of recommendation for cerebral bypass surgery. METHODS The current indications for cerebral bypass are discussed depending on the function of the bypass (flow preservation or augmentation) and analyzed according to level of evidence criteria. RESULTS Flow-preservation bypass plays an important role in managing complex intracranial aneurysms (level of evidence 4; grade of recommendation C). Flow-preservation bypass is currently only very rarely indicated in the treatment of cerebral tumors involving major cerebral arteries (level of evidence 5; grade of recommendation D). The trend has evolved in favor of partial resection and radiotherapy. To preserve the flow, the bypass is always a direct bypass.Flow-augmentation bypass is currently recommended for Moyamoya patients with ischemic symptoms and compromised hemodynamics (level of evidence 4; grade of recommendation C) and patients with hemorrhagic onset (level of evidence 1B; grade of recommendation A). Flow-augmentation bypass is currently not recommended for patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery occlusion, even in the setting of compromised cerebral hemodynamics (level of evidence 1A; grade of recommendation A), but may be considered in patients with hemodynamic failure and recurrent medically refractory symptoms as a final resort (level of evidence 5; grade of recommendation D). CONCLUSIONS The results of recent randomized clinical trials narrow the indication for cerebral bypass in the setting of ischemic cerebrovascular disease. However, cerebral bypass is still very useful for managing complex intracranial aneurysms (not amenable to selective clipping or endovascular therapies) and is the only treatment option for managing symptomatic patients with Moyamoya vasculopathy and impaired brain hemodynamics

The unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score A multidisciplinary consensus

Objective: We endeavored to develop an unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) treatment score (UIATS) model that includes and quantifies key factors involved in clinical decision-making in the management of UIAs and to assess agreement for this model among specialists in UIA management and research. Methods: An international multidisciplinary (neurosurgery, neuroradiology, neurology, clinical epidemiology) group of 69 specialists was convened to develop and validate the UIATS model using a Delphi consensus. For internal (39 panel members involved in identification of relevant features) and external validation (30 independent external reviewers), 30 selected UIA cases were used to analyze agreement with UIATS management recommendations based on a 5-point Likert scale (5 indicating strong agreement). Interrater agreement (IRA) was assessed with standardized coefficients of dispersion (v(r)*) (v(r)* 5 0 indicating excellent agreement and v(r)* = 1 indicating poor agreement). Results: The UIATS accounts for 29 key factors in UIA management. Agreement with UIATS (mean Likert scores) was 4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.1-4.3) per reviewer for both reviewer cohorts; agreement per case was 4.3 (95% CI 4.1-4.4) for panel members and 4.5 (95% CI 4.3-4.6) for external reviewers (p = 0.017). Mean Likert scores were 4.2 (95% CI 4.1-4.3) for interventional reviewers (n = 56) and 4.1 (95% CI 3.9-4.4) for noninterventional reviewers (n = 12) (p = 0.290). Overall IRA (v(r)*) for both cohorts was 0.026 (95% CI 0.019-0.033). Conclusions: This novel UIA decision guidance study captures an excellent consensus among highly informed individuals on UIA management, irrespective of their underlying specialty. Clinicians can use the UIATS as a comprehensive mechanism for indicating how a large group of specialists might manage an individual patient with a UIA.Peer reviewe

Pharmacological treatment of delayed cerebral ischemia and vasospasm in subarachnoid hemorrhage

Subarachnoid hemorrhage after the rupture of a cerebral aneurysm is the cause of 6% to 8% of all cerebrovascular accidents involving 10 of 100,000 people each year. Despite effective treatment of the aneurysm, delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) is observed in 30% of patients, with a peak on the tenth day, resulting in significant infirmity and mortality. Cerebral vasospasm occurs in more than half of all patients and is recognized as the main cause of delayed cerebral ischemia after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Its treatment comprises hemodynamic management and endovascular procedures. To date, the only drug shown to be efficacious on both the incidence of vasospasm and poor outcome is nimodipine. Given its modest effects, new pharmacological treatments are being developed to prevent and treat DCI. We review the different drugs currently being tested