Santosh B Murthy1, Issam Awad2, Sagi Harnof2, Francois Aldrich2, Mark Harrigan2, Jack Jallo2, Jean-Louis Caron2, Judy Huang2, Paul Camarata2, Lucia Rivera Lara2, Rachel Dlugash2, Nichol McBee2, Vahid Eslami2, Daniel F Hanley2, Wendy C Ziai2. 1. From the Department of Neurology (S.B.M.) and Clinical and Translational Neuroscience Unit, Feil Family Brain and Mind Research Institute (S.B.M.), Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY; Department of Neurological Surgery (I.A.), University of Chicago Medicine, IL; Department of Neurological Surgery (S.H.), Chaim Sheba, Israel; Department of Neurological Surgery (F.A.), University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore; Department of Neurological Surgery (M.H.), University of Alabama School of Medicine, Birmingham; Department of Neurological Surgery (J.J.), Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA; Department of Neurological Surgery (J.-L.C.) and Division of Neurosciences Critical Care, Department of Neurology (L.R.L., W.C.Z.), Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; Department of Neurological Surgery (J.H.), School of Medicine, University of Texas Health, San Antonio; Department of Neurological Surgery (P.C.), University of Kansas, Kansas City; and Division of Brain Injury Outcomes Center (R.D., N.M., V.E., D.F.H.), Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. sam9200@med.cornell.edu. 2. From the Department of Neurology (S.B.M.) and Clinical and Translational Neuroscience Unit, Feil Family Brain and Mind Research Institute (S.B.M.), Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY; Department of Neurological Surgery (I.A.), University of Chicago Medicine, IL; Department of Neurological Surgery (S.H.), Chaim Sheba, Israel; Department of Neurological Surgery (F.A.), University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore; Department of Neurological Surgery (M.H.), University of Alabama School of Medicine, Birmingham; Department of Neurological Surgery (J.J.), Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA; Department of Neurological Surgery (J.-L.C.) and Division of Neurosciences Critical Care, Department of Neurology (L.R.L., W.C.Z.), Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; Department of Neurological Surgery (J.H.), School of Medicine, University of Texas Health, San Antonio; Department of Neurological Surgery (P.C.), University of Kansas, Kansas City; and Division of Brain Injury Outcomes Center (R.D., N.M., V.E., D.F.H.), Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study factors associated with permanent CSF diversion and the relationship between shunting and functional outcomes in spontaneous intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH). METHODS: Clot Lysis Evaluation of Accelerated Resolution of Intraventricular Hemorrhage (CLEAR III), a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, was conducted to determine if pragmatically employed external ventricular drainage (EVD) plus intraventricular alteplase improved outcome, in comparison to EVD plus saline. Outcome measures were predictors of shunting and blinded assessment of mortality and modified Rankin Scale at 180 days. RESULTS: Among the 500 patients with IVH, CSF shunting was performed in 90 (18%) patients at a median of 18 (interquartile range [IQR] 13-30) days. Patient demographics and IVH characteristics were similar among patients with and without shunts. In the multivariate analysis, black race (odds ratio [OR] 1.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-3.34), duration of EVD (OR 1.10; CI 1.05-1.15), placement of more than one EVD (OR 1.93; CI 1.13-3.31), daily drainage CSF per 10 mL (OR 1.07; CI 1.04-1.10), and intracranial pressure >30 mm Hg (OR 1.70; CI 1.09-2.88) were associated with higher odds of permanent CSF shunting. Patients who had CSF shunts had similar odds of 180-day mortality, while survivors with shunts had increased odds of poor functional outcome, compared to survivors without shunts. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with spontaneous IVH requiring emergency CSF diversion, those with early elevated intracranial pressure, high CSF output, and placement of more than one EVD are at increased odds of permanent ventricular shunting. Administration of intraventricular alteplase, early radiographic findings, and CSF measures were not useful predictors of permanent CSF diversion.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To study factors associated with permanent CSF diversion and the relationship between shunting and functional outcomes in spontaneous intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH). METHODS: Clot Lysis Evaluation of Accelerated Resolution of Intraventricular Hemorrhage (CLEAR III), a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, was conducted to determine if pragmatically employed external ventricular drainage (EVD) plus intraventricular alteplase improved outcome, in comparison to EVD plus saline. Outcome measures were predictors of shunting and blinded assessment of mortality and modified Rankin Scale at 180 days. RESULTS: Among the 500 patients with IVH, CSF shunting was performed in 90 (18%) patients at a median of 18 (interquartile range [IQR] 13-30) days. Patient demographics and IVH characteristics were similar among patients with and without shunts. In the multivariate analysis, black race (odds ratio [OR] 1.98; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-3.34), duration of EVD (OR 1.10; CI 1.05-1.15), placement of more than one EVD (OR 1.93; CI 1.13-3.31), daily drainage CSF per 10 mL (OR 1.07; CI 1.04-1.10), and intracranial pressure >30 mm Hg (OR 1.70; CI 1.09-2.88) were associated with higher odds of permanent CSF shunting. Patients who had CSF shunts had similar odds of 180-day mortality, while survivors with shunts had increased odds of poor functional outcome, compared to survivors without shunts. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with spontaneous IVH requiring emergency CSF diversion, those with early elevated intracranial pressure, high CSF output, and placement of more than one EVD are at increased odds of permanent ventricular shunting. Administration of intraventricular alteplase, early radiographic findings, and CSF measures were not useful predictors of permanent CSF diversion.
Authors: Daniel F Hanley; Karen Lane; Nichol McBee; Wendy Ziai; Stanley Tuhrim; Kennedy R Lees; Jesse Dawson; Dheeraj Gandhi; Natalie Ullman; W Andrew Mould; Steven W Mayo; A David Mendelow; Barbara Gregson; Kenneth Butcher; Paul Vespa; David W Wright; Carlos S Kase; J Ricardo Carhuapoma; Penelope M Keyl; Marie Diener-West; John Muschelli; Joshua F Betz; Carol B Thompson; Elizabeth A Sugar; Gayane Yenokyan; Scott Janis; Sayona John; Sagi Harnof; George A Lopez; E Francois Aldrich; Mark R Harrigan; Safdar Ansari; Jack Jallo; Jean-Louis Caron; David LeDoux; Opeolu Adeoye; Mario Zuccarello; Harold P Adams; Michael Rosenblum; Richard E Thompson; Issam A Awad Journal: Lancet Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Hadie Adams; Vin Shen Ban; Ville Leinonen; Salah G Aoun; Jukka Huttunen; Taavi Saavalainen; Antti Lindgren; Juhana Frosen; Mikael Fraunberg; Timo Koivisto; Juha Hernesniemi; Babu G Welch; Juha E Jaaskelainen; Terhi J Huttunen Journal: Stroke Date: 2016-09-15 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Charlotte Jj van Asch; Merel Ja Luitse; Gabriël Je Rinkel; Ingeborg van der Tweel; Ale Algra; Catharina Jm Klijn Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2010-01-05 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Andrew S Little; Joseph M Zabramski; Madelon Peterson; Pamela W Goslar; Scott D Wait; Felipe C Albuquerque; Cameron G McDougall; Robert F Spetzler Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Wendy C Ziai; Santosh B Murthy; David J Roh; Ifeyinwa S Asonye; Fernanda Carvalho Poyraz; Jessica R Magid-Bernstein; Evan F Joiner; Radhika Avadhani; Issam Awad; Daniel F Hanley Journal: Stroke Date: 2022-01-28 Impact factor: 10.170