Miriam Weiss1,2, Walid Albanna1, Catharina Conzen-Dilger1, Nick Kastenholz1, Katharina Seyfried1, Hani Ridwan3, Martin Wiesmann3, Michael Veldeman1, Tobias Philip Schmidt1, Murad Megjhani4,5, Henna Schulze-Steinen6, Hans Clusmann1, Marinus Johannes Hermanus Aries7,8, Soojin Park4,5,9, Gerrit Alexander Schubert1,2. 1. Department of Neurosurgery (M.W., W.A., C.C.-D., N.K., K.S., M.V., T.P.S., H.C., G.A.S.), RWTH Aachen University, Germany. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Kantonsspital Aarau, Switzerland (M.W., G.A.S.). 3. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology (H.R., M.W.), RWTH Aachen University, Germany. 4. Program for Hospital and Intensive Care Informatics, Department of Neurology (M.M., S.P.), Columbia University Irving Medical Center, NY. 5. NewYork Presbyterian Hospital (M.M., S.P.), Columbia University Irving Medical Center, NY. 6. Department of Intensive Care Medicine and Perioperative Care (H.S.-S.), RWTH Aachen University, Germany. 7. Department of Intensive Care, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht University, the Netherlands (M.J.H.A.). 8. School for Mental Health and Neuroscience (MHeNS), Maastricht University Medical Center, the Netherlands (M.J.H.A.). 9. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, NY (S.P.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rescue treatment for delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) after subarachnoid hemorrhage can include induced hypertension (iHTN) and, in refractory cases, endovascular approaches, of which selective, continuous intraarterial nimodipine (IAN) is one variant. The combination of iHTN and IAN can dramatically increase vasopressor demand. In case of unsustainable doses, iHTN is often prioritized over IAN. However, evidence in this regard is largely lacking. We investigated the effects of a classical (iHTN+IAN) and modified (IANonly) treatment protocol for refractory DCI in an observational study. METHODS: Rescue treatment for DCI was initiated with iHTN (target >180 mm Hg systolic) and escalated to IAN in refractory cases. Until July 2018, both iHTN and IAN were offered in cases refractory to iHTN alone. After protocol modification, iHTN target was preemptively lowered to >120 mm Hg when IAN was initiated (IANonly). Primary outcome was noradrenaline demand. Secondary outcomes included noradrenaline-associated complications, brain tissue oxygenation, DCI-related infarction and favorable 6-month outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale 4-5). RESULTS: N=29 and n=20 patients were treated according to the classical and modified protocol, respectively. Protocol modification resulted in a significant reduction of noradrenaline demand (iHTN+IAN 0.70±0.54 µg/kg per minute and IANonly 0.26±0.20 µg/kg per minute, P<0.0001) and minor complications (15.0% versus 48.3%, unadjusted odds ratio, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.05-0.79]; P<0.05) with comparable rates of major complications (20.0% versus 20.7%, odds ratio, 0.96 [0.23-3.95]; P=0.95). Incidence of DCI-related infarction (45.0% versus 41.1%, odds ratio, 1.16 [0.37-3.66]; P=0.80) and favorable clinical outcome (55.6% versus 40.0%, odds ratio, 1.88 [0.55-6.39]; P=0.32) were similar. Brain tissue oxygenation was significantly higher with IANonly (26.6±12.8, 39.6±15.4 mm Hg; P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Assuming the potential of iHTN to be exhausted in case of refractory hypoperfusion, additional IAN may serve as a last-resort measure to bridge hypoperfusion in the DCI phase. With close monitoring, preemptive lowering of pressure target after induction of IAN may be a safe alternative to alleviate total noradrenaline load and potentially reduce complication rate.
BACKGROUND: Rescue treatment for delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) after subarachnoid hemorrhage can include induced hypertension (iHTN) and, in refractory cases, endovascular approaches, of which selective, continuous intraarterial nimodipine (IAN) is one variant. The combination of iHTN and IAN can dramatically increase vasopressor demand. In case of unsustainable doses, iHTN is often prioritized over IAN. However, evidence in this regard is largely lacking. We investigated the effects of a classical (iHTN+IAN) and modified (IANonly) treatment protocol for refractory DCI in an observational study. METHODS: Rescue treatment for DCI was initiated with iHTN (target >180 mm Hg systolic) and escalated to IAN in refractory cases. Until July 2018, both iHTN and IAN were offered in cases refractory to iHTN alone. After protocol modification, iHTN target was preemptively lowered to >120 mm Hg when IAN was initiated (IANonly). Primary outcome was noradrenaline demand. Secondary outcomes included noradrenaline-associated complications, brain tissue oxygenation, DCI-related infarction and favorable 6-month outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale 4-5). RESULTS: N=29 and n=20 patients were treated according to the classical and modified protocol, respectively. Protocol modification resulted in a significant reduction of noradrenaline demand (iHTN+IAN 0.70±0.54 µg/kg per minute and IANonly 0.26±0.20 µg/kg per minute, P<0.0001) and minor complications (15.0% versus 48.3%, unadjusted odds ratio, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.05-0.79]; P<0.05) with comparable rates of major complications (20.0% versus 20.7%, odds ratio, 0.96 [0.23-3.95]; P=0.95). Incidence of DCI-related infarction (45.0% versus 41.1%, odds ratio, 1.16 [0.37-3.66]; P=0.80) and favorable clinical outcome (55.6% versus 40.0%, odds ratio, 1.88 [0.55-6.39]; P=0.32) were similar. Brain tissue oxygenation was significantly higher with IANonly (26.6±12.8, 39.6±15.4 mm Hg; P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Assuming the potential of iHTN to be exhausted in case of refractory hypoperfusion, additional IAN may serve as a last-resort measure to bridge hypoperfusion in the DCI phase. With close monitoring, preemptive lowering of pressure target after induction of IAN may be a safe alternative to alleviate total noradrenaline load and potentially reduce complication rate.
Authors: Andrew P Carlson; Daniel Hänggi; George K Wong; Nima Etminan; Stephan A Mayer; François Aldrich; Michael N Diringer; Erich Schmutzhard; Herbert J Faleck; David Ng; Benjamin R Saville; Thomas Bleck; Robert Grubb; Michael Miller; Jose I Suarez; Howard M Proskin; R Loch Macdonald Journal: Stroke Date: 2020-03-06 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: L Andereggen; J Beck; W J Z'Graggen; G Schroth; R H Andres; M Murek; M Haenggi; M Reinert; A Raabe; J Gralla Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-12-15 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Andrej Paľa; Max Schneider; Christine Brand; Maria Teresa Pedro; Yigit Özpeynirci; Bernd Schmitz; Christian Rainer Wirtz; Thomas Kapapa; Ralph König; Michael Braun Journal: Neurosurg Rev Date: 2018-05-26 Impact factor: 3.042
Authors: Michael Veldeman; Walid Albanna; Miriam Weiss; Catharina Conzen; Tobias Philip Schmidt; Henna Schulze-Steinen; Martin Wiesmann; Hans Clusmann; Gerrit Alexander Schubert Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2020-05-15 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Miriam Weiss; Catharina Conzen; Marguerite Mueller; Martin Wiesmann; Hans Clusmann; Walid Albanna; Gerrit Alexander Schubert Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2019-02-21 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Claudia Ditz; Björn Machner; Hannes Schacht; Alexander Neumann; Peter Schramm; Volker M Tronnier; Jan Küchler Journal: Neurosurg Rev Date: 2021-01-25 Impact factor: 3.042