Department of Neurosurgery, University of Cincinnati (UC) College of Medicine, Cerebrovascular Center at UC Neuroscience Institute, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
J Neurointerv Surg. 2014 Mar;6(2):108-14. doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2012-010591. Epub 2013 Jan 29.
Risks associated with endovascular management remain unaddressed for post-hemorrhagic cerebral vasospasm (PHCV) caused by pathologies that cannot be secured or identified before vasospasm treatment. This retrospective study reviews our 10 year experience in the difficult scenario of subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) with vasospasm, including intra-arterial vasodilators or percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) to vessels feeding a ruptured unsecured lesion.
10 SAH patients with ruptured unsecured vascular lesions underwent 44 endovascular treatments for PHCV (2002-2011). We defined unsecured as an untreated aneurysm/dissection, incompletely coiled aneurysm, dissection covered with self-expanding nitinol stents, or angiographically negative SAH. Treatments were categorized by location of the ruptured unsecured (partial or complete) lesion relative to the vessel treated for vasospasm.
Our 10 patients with four aneurysms, four dissections, and two angiographically negative SAH accounted for 10.3% of SAH patients who underwent angiography for vasospasm. No procedure related complications occurred when treating vessels not supplying the index lesion or with angiographically negative SAH. Of the endovascular treated vessels supplying partially secured lesions, one (6.3%) fatal complication occurred; none of these patients receiving only vasodilators had complications. With endovascular treatment of PHCV with completely unsecured lesions, one (33%) complication was fatal.
Endovascular treatment appeared safe for PHCV for vessels not supplying the index arterial lesion and for angiographically negative SAH. Vasodilators were safe for vessels harboring partially secured, ruptured lesions (eg, incompletely coiled aneurysms, stented dissections). Following two major complications, the safety of administering vasodilators or performing PTA to vessels supplying completely unsecured vascular lesions remains inconclusive and should be used cautiously.
对于因血管痉挛治疗前无法固定或确定的病变引起的出血性后脑血管痉挛(PHCV),血管内治疗的相关风险仍未得到解决。本回顾性研究回顾了我们在蛛网膜下腔出血(SAH)伴血管痉挛的困难情况下 10 年的经验,包括血管内血管扩张剂或经皮腔内血管成形术(PTA)治疗破裂未固定病变的供血血管。
10 例因破裂未固定血管病变而行 44 次 PHCV 血管内治疗的 SAH 患者(2002-2011 年)。我们将未固定定义为未治疗的动脉瘤/夹层、不完全螺旋动脉瘤、用自膨式镍钛合金支架覆盖的夹层或血管造影阴性的 SAH。根据破裂未固定(部分或完全)病变与血管痉挛治疗血管的位置对治疗进行分类。
我们的 10 例患者有 4 个动脉瘤、4 个夹层和 2 个血管造影阴性的 SAH,占行血管造影治疗血管痉挛的 SAH 患者的 10.3%。在治疗不供应靶病变或血管造影阴性的血管时,未发生与操作相关的并发症。治疗部分固定病变的供血血管中,1 例(6.3%)发生致命并发症;仅接受血管扩张剂治疗的患者均无并发症。对完全未固定病变进行血管内治疗后,1 例(33%)发生致命并发症。
血管内治疗对不供应靶动脉病变的 PHCV 供血血管以及血管造影阴性的 SAH 似乎是安全的。血管扩张剂对部分固定破裂病变(如不完全螺旋动脉瘤、支架夹层)供血血管是安全的。在发生两例严重并发症后,给予血管扩张剂或对完全未固定血管病变进行 PTA 的安全性仍不确定,应谨慎使用。