Vatter Hartmut, Güresir Erdem, König Ralph, Durner Gregor, Kalff Rolf, Schuss Patrick, Mayer Thomas E, Konczalla Jürgen, Hattingen Elke, Seifert Volker, Berkefeld Joachim
Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany.
Department of Neurosurgery, University of Ulm, Günzburg, 89081 Ulm, Germany.
J Clin Med. 2022 Oct 20;11(20):6197. doi: 10.3390/jcm11206197.
Cerebral vasospasm (CVS) is associated with delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). The most frequently used form of rescue therapy for CVS is invasive endovascular therapy. Due to a lack of prospective data, we performed a prospective randomized multicenter trial (NCT01400360). A total of 34 patients in three centers were randomized to invasive endovascular treatment or conservative therapy at diagnosis of relevant CVS onset. Imaging data was assessed by a neuroradiologist blinded for treatment allocation. Primary outcome measure was development of DCI. Secondary endpoints included clinical outcome at 6 months after SAH. A total of 18 of the 34 patients were treated conservatively, and 16 patients were treated with invasive endovascular treatment for CVS. There was no statistical difference in the rate of cerebral infarctions either at initial or at the follow-up MRI between the groups. However, the outcome at 6 months was better in patients treated conservatively (mRs 2 ± 1.5 vs. 4 ± 1.8, = 0.005). Invasive endovascular treatment for CVS does not lead to a lower rate of DCI but might lead to poorer outcomes compared to induced hypertension. The potential benefits of endovascular treatment for CVS need to be addressed in further studies, searching for a subgroup of patients who may benefit.
脑血管痉挛(CVS)与动脉瘤性蛛网膜下腔出血(SAH)后的迟发性脑缺血(DCI)相关。CVS最常用的抢救治疗方式是侵入性血管内治疗。由于缺乏前瞻性数据,我们进行了一项前瞻性随机多中心试验(NCT01400360)。三个中心的34例患者在诊断为相关CVS发作时被随机分配接受侵入性血管内治疗或保守治疗。影像数据由一位对治疗分配不知情的神经放射科医生进行评估。主要结局指标是DCI的发生情况。次要终点包括SAH后6个月的临床结局。34例患者中,18例接受了保守治疗,16例接受了CVS的侵入性血管内治疗。两组在初始或随访MRI时的脑梗死发生率无统计学差异。然而,保守治疗患者6个月时的结局更好(改良Rankin量表评分2±1.5 vs. 4±1.8,P = 0.005)。CVS的侵入性血管内治疗不会降低DCI的发生率,但与诱导性高血压相比可能导致更差的结局。CVS血管内治疗的潜在益处需要在进一步研究中探讨,寻找可能受益的患者亚组。