INTRODUCTION:Cerebral edema after ischemic stroke is frequently treated with mannitol and hypertonic saline (HS); however, their relative cerebrovascular and metabolic effects are incompletely understood, and may operate independent of their ability to lower intracranial pressure. METHODS: We compared the effects of 20% mannitol and 23.4% saline on cerebral blood flow (CBF), blood volume (CBV), oxygen extraction fraction (OEF), and oxygen metabolism (CMRO(2)), in nine ischemic stroke patients who deteriorated and had >2 mm midline shift on imaging. (15)O-PET was performed before and 1 h after administration of randomly assigned equi-osmolar doses of mannitol (1.0 g/kg) or 23.4% saline (0.686 mL/kg). RESULTS:Baseline CBF values (ml/100g/min) in the infarct core, periinfarct region, remaining ipsilateral hemisphere, and contralateral hemisphere in the mannitol group were 5.0 ± 3.9, 25.6 ± 4.4, 35.6 ± 8.6, and 45.5 ± 2.2, respectively, and in the HS group were 8.3 ± 9.8, 35.3 ± 10.9, 38.2 ± 15.1, and 35.2 ± 12.4, respectively. There was a trend for CBF to rise in the contralateral hemisphere after mannitol from 45.5 ± 12.2 to 57.6 ± 21.7, P = 0.098, but not HS. CBV, OEF, and CMRO(2) did not change after administration of either agent. Change in CBF in the contralateral hemisphere after osmotic therapy was strongly correlated with baseline blood pressure (R (2)= 0.879, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that at higher perfusion pressures, osmotic agents may raise CBF in non-ischemic tissue. We conclude that at higher perfusion pressures, osmotic agents may raise CBF in non-ischemic tissue.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION:Cerebral edema after ischemic stroke is frequently treated with mannitol and hypertonicsaline (HS); however, their relative cerebrovascular and metabolic effects are incompletely understood, and may operate independent of their ability to lower intracranial pressure. METHODS: We compared the effects of 20% mannitol and 23.4% saline on cerebral blood flow (CBF), blood volume (CBV), oxygen extraction fraction (OEF), and oxygen metabolism (CMRO(2)), in nine ischemic strokepatients who deteriorated and had >2 mm midline shift on imaging. (15)O-PET was performed before and 1 h after administration of randomly assigned equi-osmolar doses of mannitol (1.0 g/kg) or 23.4% saline (0.686 mL/kg). RESULTS: Baseline CBF values (ml/100g/min) in the infarct core, periinfarct region, remaining ipsilateral hemisphere, and contralateral hemisphere in the mannitol group were 5.0 ± 3.9, 25.6 ± 4.4, 35.6 ± 8.6, and 45.5 ± 2.2, respectively, and in the HS group were 8.3 ± 9.8, 35.3 ± 10.9, 38.2 ± 15.1, and 35.2 ± 12.4, respectively. There was a trend for CBF to rise in the contralateral hemisphere after mannitol from 45.5 ± 12.2 to 57.6 ± 21.7, P = 0.098, but not HS. CBV, OEF, and CMRO(2) did not change after administration of either agent. Change in CBF in the contralateral hemisphere after osmotic therapy was strongly correlated with baseline blood pressure (R (2)= 0.879, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that at higher perfusion pressures, osmotic agents may raise CBF in non-ischemic tissue. We conclude that at higher perfusion pressures, osmotic agents may raise CBF in non-ischemic tissue.
Authors: Harold P Adams; Gregory del Zoppo; Mark J Alberts; Deepak L Bhatt; Lawrence Brass; Anthony Furlan; Robert L Grubb; Randall T Higashida; Edward C Jauch; Chelsea Kidwell; Patrick D Lyden; Lewis B Morgenstern; Adnan I Qureshi; Robert H Rosenwasser; Phillip A Scott; Eelco F M Wijdicks Journal: Stroke Date: 2007-04-12 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Katayoun Vahedi; Jeannette Hofmeijer; Eric Juettler; Eric Vicaut; Bernard George; Ale Algra; G Johan Amelink; Peter Schmiedeck; Stefan Schwab; Peter M Rothwell; Marie-Germaine Bousser; H Bart van der Worp; Werner Hacke Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: J I Suarez; A I Qureshi; A Bhardwaj; M A Williams; M S Schnitzer; M Mirski; D F Hanley; J A Ulatowski Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 1998-06 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Mauro Oddo; Daniele Poole; Raimund Helbok; Geert Meyfroidt; Nino Stocchetti; Pierre Bouzat; Maurizio Cecconi; Thomas Geeraerts; Ignacio Martin-Loeches; Hervé Quintard; Fabio Silvio Taccone; Romergryko G Geocadin; Claude Hemphill; Carole Ichai; David Menon; Jean-François Payen; Anders Perner; Martin Smith; José Suarez; Walter Videtta; Elisa R Zanier; Giuseppe Citerio Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2018-03-02 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Antonio Muscari; Luca Faccioli; Maria Vittoria Lega; Andrea Lorusso; Marco Pastore Trossello; Giovanni M Puddu; Luca Spinardi; Marco Zoli Journal: Neurol Sci Date: 2019-01-19 Impact factor: 3.307
Authors: Sang-Bae Ko; H Alex Choi; Gunjan Parikh; J Michael Schmidt; Kiwon Lee; Neeraj Badjatia; Jan Claassen; E Sander Connolly; Stephan A Mayer Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2012-08-22 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Eric M Liotta; Bryan D Lizza; Anna L Romanova; James C Guth; Michael D Berman; Timothy J Carroll; Brandon Francis; Daniel Ganger; Daniela P Ladner; Matthew B Maas; Andrew M Naidech Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Aaron M Cook; G Morgan Jones; Gregory W J Hawryluk; Patrick Mailloux; Diane McLaughlin; Alexander Papangelou; Sophie Samuel; Sheri Tokumaru; Chitra Venkatasubramanian; Christopher Zacko; Lara L Zimmermann; Karen Hirsch; Lori Shutter Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 3.210