Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Document Type
- Journal article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Keywords
- magnetic resonance imaging (2)
- cardiac imaging (1)
- computed tomography (1)
- computerized tomography (1)
- echocardiography (1)
- expert opinion (1)
- intracerebral hemorrhage (1)
- ischemic stroke (1)
- stroke (1)
- stroke management (1)
Institute
- Neurologische Klinik und Poliklinik (2) (remove)
This expert opinion paper on cardiac imaging after acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) includes a statement of the "Heart and Brain" consortium of the German Cardiac Society and the German Stroke Society. The Stroke Unit-Commission of the German Stroke Society and the German Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET) endorsed this paper. Cardiac imaging is a key component of etiological work-up after stroke. Enhanced echocardiographic tools, constantly improving cardiac computer tomography (CT) as well as cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) offer comprehensive non- or less-invasive cardiac evaluation at the expense of increased costs and/or radiation exposure. Certain imaging findings usually lead to a change in medical secondary stroke prevention or may influence medical treatment. However, there is no proof from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that the choice of the imaging method influences the prognosis of stroke patients. Summarizing present knowledge, the German Heart and Brain consortium proposes an interdisciplinary, staged standard diagnostic scheme for the detection of risk factors of cardio-embolic stroke. This expert opinion paper aims to give practical advice to physicians who are involved in stroke care. In line with the nature of an expert opinion paper, labeling of classes of recommendations is not provided, since many statements are based on expert opinion, reported case series, and clinical experience.
Background: According to current guidelines, stroke patients treated with rt-PA should undergo brain imaging to exclude intracerebral bleeding 24 h after thrombolysis, before the start of medical secondary prevention. However, the usefulness of routine follow-up imaging with regard to changes in therapeutic management in patients without neurological deterioration is unclear. We hypothesized that follow up brain imaging solely to exclude bleeding in patients who clinically improved after rt-PA application may not be necessary.
Methods: Retrospective single-center analysis including stroke patients treated with rt-PA. Records were reviewed for hemorrhagic transformation one day after systemic thrombolysis and brain imaging-based changes in therapeutic management. Twenty-four hour after thrombolysis patients were divided into four groups: (1) increased NIHSS score; (2) unchanged NIHSS score; (3) improved NIHSS score and; (4) NIHSS score = 0.
Results: Out of 188 patients (mean age 73 years, 100 female) receiving rt-PA, 32 (17%) had imaging-proven hemorrhagic transformation including 11 (6%) patients with parenchymal hemorrhage. Patients in group (1, 2) more often had hypertension (p = 0.015) and more often had parenchymal hemorrhage (9 vs. 4%; p < 0.206) compared to group (3, 4) and imaging-based changes in therapeutic management were more frequent (19% vs. 6%; p = 0.007). Patients of group (3, 4) had no changes in therapeutic management in 94% of the cases. Patients in group (4) had no hemorrhagic transformation in routine follow-up brain imaging.
Conclusions: Frequency of hemorrhagic transformation in Routine follow-up brain imaging and consecutive changes in therapeutic management were different depending on clinical course measured by NHISS score.