Patel Smit D, Haynes Rafique, Staff Ilene, Tunguturi Ajay, Elmoursi Sedeek, Nouh Amre
Department of Neurology, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, Connecticut, USA.
Department of Research, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, Connecticut, USA.
Brain Circ. 2020 Sep 30;6(3):175-180. doi: 10.4103/bc.bc_19_20. eCollection 2020 Jul-Sep.
While there exists a substantial literature on the risk factors and clinical manifestations of cervical artery dissection (CeAD) including carotid and vertebral artery, little is known about postdissection recanalization. The goal of our study was to provide a descriptive analysis of CeAD and recanalization after dissection with neuroimaging follow up.
We retrospectively analyzed 51 consecutive patients with confirmed diagnoses of CeAD based on neuroimaging. Demographic data, risk factors, and dissection characteristics were recorded. Neuroimaging studies were performed at 0, 3, 6, and >6 months.
Among 51 cases, the mean age of dissection (mean ± standard error) was 49.4 ± 1.92 years, and female comprised 58.8% of the patients. Extent of stenosis was 100% dissection in 37.3%, 51%-99% in 41.2%, and <51% in 21.5%. The most common presenting symptoms were headache (54.9%), neck pain (49.0%), and dizziness/gait imbalance (39.2%). The most common associated risk factors were recent history of trauma to the head and neck (41.2%) and hypertension (41.2%). In follow-up imaging, overall, 47.1% (24/51) had complete recanalization (CR), while 35.3% (18/51) did not; in the former group, 75% (18/24) recanalized completely during the first 6 months following symptom onset. A majority (84.3%) of the patients were discharged home, 15.7% were discharged to a facility, and no mortality was reported. Interestingly, location, type-/nature of dissection, and treatment did not statistically appear to influence the likelihood of recanalization.
The recanalization of CeAD occurs mainly within the first 6 months after symptom onset, following which healing slows down. The study did not find an association between location, pattern, or nature of dissection on artery recanalization.
虽然已有大量关于颈动脉和椎动脉等颈动脉瘤样夹层(CeAD)的危险因素及临床表现的文献,但对于夹层后再通情况却知之甚少。我们研究的目的是通过神经影像学随访,对CeAD及其夹层后的再通情况进行描述性分析。
我们对51例经神经影像学确诊为CeAD的连续患者进行了回顾性分析。记录了人口统计学数据、危险因素和夹层特征。在0、3、6和>6个月时进行了神经影像学检查。
在51例病例中,夹层的平均年龄(平均值±标准误)为49.4±1.92岁,女性占患者的58.8%。狭窄程度为100%夹层的占37.3%,51%-99%的占41.2%,<51%的占21.5%。最常见的首发症状是头痛(54.9%)、颈部疼痛(49.0%)和头晕/步态不稳(39.2%)。最常见的相关危险因素是近期头颈部外伤史(41.2%)和高血压(41.2%)。在随访影像学检查中,总体而言,47.1%(24/51)实现了完全再通(CR),而35.3%(18/51)未实现;在前一组中,75%(18/24)在症状发作后的前6个月内完全再通。大多数(84.3%)患者出院回家,15.7%出院至医疗机构,未报告死亡病例。有趣的是,夹层的位置、类型/性质和治疗在统计学上似乎并未影响再通的可能性。
CeAD的再通主要发生在症状发作后的前6个月内,此后愈合速度减慢。该研究未发现夹层的位置、模式或性质与动脉再通之间存在关联。