Ravindran, Krishnan

Abstract Management options for carotid stenosis include medical management, carotid endarterectomy, carotid stenting with distal filter protection, or stenting with either flow arrest or flow reversal techniques. 1 Flow reversal with transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) technique represents a hybrid approach with surgical access to the common carotid for endovascular placement of a stent in the internal carotid artery. This direct access to the carotid artery avoids navigating the challenging anatomy of the aortic arch with endovascular devices. 2 Compared to transfemoral stenting, TCAR possesses lower risk of transient ischemic attack and stroke, and compared to carotid endarterectomy, there is less risk of cranial neuropathy. 3,4 We present the case of an 87-yr-old man with recurrent severe stenosis (85%) of the right internal carotid artery. The patient had a remote history of bilateral endarterectomies for asymptomatic stenosis and was found with recurrence and progression of right internal carotid artery stenosis. Options were discussed and decision was made to proceed with TCAR after he consented for the procedure. The patient tolerated the procedure well with satisfactory revascularization. Exam remained unremarkable prior to discharge on postoperative day 1 and during follow-up at 1 mo. Patient consented to the publication of their image.

Abstract Cerebral venous sinus stenting has gained popularity in recent years as a safe and efficacious treatment of selected patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) and focal venous sinus stenosis.1–3 - 3 The main goal of treatment is to prevent visual loss, and often patients report resolution of headache and visual symptoms within 21 mo of mean follow-up.4–8 - 8 We present the case of a 57-yr-old woman with medically refractory IIH, bilateral sinus stenosis, and a mass lesion causing stenosis on the left. Venous angiogram with pressure monitoring was completed with the patient awake, which showed a significant pressure gradient on the right (19 mm Hg) and borderline gradient on the left (8 mm Hg). Options were reviewed and decision was made to proceed with the treatment of the right-sided stenosis with stenting and continue with the observation of the lesion on the left to prevent further visual deterioration. The patient consented for the procedure, and she tolerated the procedure well. Neurological exam remained at baseline, and she was discharged home on post-operative day #1. At 2 mo’s follow-up, the patient reported improvement in headaches and remained intact neurologically.

Background and Purpose: The hypoperfusion intensity ratio (HIR) is a perfusion-weighted imaging parameter defined as the ratio of Tmax>10 seconds : Tmax>6 seconds volume and is believed to be reflective of collateral strength and consequently influence infarct growth. We sought to assess the utility of the HIR in predicting infarct growth in patients undergoing thrombectomy at a comprehensive stroke center (CSC). Methods: Consecutive acute ischemic stroke patients transferred to our CSC from 09/2010-11/2018 were identified and included if the following criteria were met: 1)computed tomography perfusion (CTP) imaging enabling assessment of baseline ischemic core volume and HIR 2) follow-up neuroimaging for assessment of final infarct volumes and 3)modified Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction scale (mTICI) 2c status or greater post-thrombectomy. Infarct growth rate (IGR) was calculated as the difference between infarct volume on follow-up imaging and the acute DWI lesion volume, divided by time from CTP to reperfusion in hours. Results: 461 patients (median age, 64 [55-75] years, median baseline NIHSS, 16 [12-21]) were eligible for this analysis. HIR poorly correlated with IGR (Spearman’s rho=0.001, p=0.89). An HIR cut-off of 0.5 was not able to discriminate ‘fast progressors’ (IGR>5 mL/hr) (AUC 0.42, sensitivity 40%, specificity 51%), or IGR at thresholds of either 2.5 or 10 mL/hr (AUC 0.44 and 0.49 respectively, with 95% confidence intervals [0.35-0.52] and [0.41-0.57], respectively). Similarly, an HIR of 0.5 only weakly distinguished ‘fast progression’ in patients reperfused beyond 120 min from imaging and patients with early CTP (last known well to CTP<6 hrs) (AUC 0.59, sensitivity 43%, specificity 68% and AUC 0.50, sensitivity 45%, specificity 55%). On multiple regression analysis, HIR was not predictive of infarct growth (regression equation=18.09+8.48x, F=2.46, p=0.11, R 2 =0.13) but was predictive of ‘fast progression’ (OR 0.22, 95% CI [0.09-0.60], p=0.003, pseudo-R 2 =0.16). Conclusions: Though predictive of fast progression, the HIR is a poor discriminator of infarct growth in successfully reperfused thrombectomy patients who undergo perfusion imaging at a CSC, and thus should not be factored into treatment decision-making.

Abstract Thromboembolic complications during aneurysm coiling are rare, with higher rates noted in ruptured aneurysms as patients are not usually premedicated with dual antiplatelet therapy. 1,2 Management includes a series of escalating strategies, including medical therapy and intra-arterial thrombolysis. 3-6 Additional strategies include mechanical thrombectomy with suction aspiration and stent retrievers. 3 Intracranial stenting can be used as a last resource, especially in ruptured cases given the need for dual antiplatelets to prevent stent thrombosis. 2 We present the case of a 42-yr-old man with a ruptured left internal carotid artery aneurysm with associated intracranial and intraventricular hemorrhage. The patient was initially presented to an outside facility after he was found in bed unable to speak and with right hemiparesis. The patient consented for surgery and underwent external ventricular drain (EVD) placement for the treatment of obstructive hydrocephalus, followed by diagnostic cerebral angiogram and aneurysm coiling. After the deployment of the last coil, control angiogram showed a small filling defect at the interface between the aneurysm neck and the distal vessel. The patient received intravenous heparin for therapeutic ACT and aspirin load. After progressive enlargement of the thrombus, the patient received intra-arterial glycoprotein (GP) IIB/IIIA inhibitors with a microcatheter positioned proximal to the thrombus. As the thrombus mass continued to enlarge, mechanical thrombectomy with an aspiration catheter was performed twice. Follow-up angiogram 20 min after the second aspiration demonstrated near-complete resolution of the thrombus. The patient recovered from his right hemiparesis, and he was discharged to rehabilitation on POD #21.

AbstractConjoined nerve roots are an infrequent and uncommon finding, rarely noted preoperatively. The conjoined root anomaly has potential for significant neurological injury during surgery. Preoperative recognition may avert disastrous nerve root injury but requires a high degree of clinical suspicion. We present the case of a 44-year-old patient with left L5/S1 radiculopathy caused by a herniated disc. During surgery we identified a triple conjoined nerve root anatomy. This anatomical variant, to our knowledge, has not been reported in literature. We describe the anatomical findings and surgical implications.

Abstract Flow diverters have drastically changed the landscape of intracranial aneurysm treatment and are now considered first-line therapy for select lesions. Their mechanism of action relies on intrinsic alteration in hemodynamic parameters, both at the parent artery and within the aneurysm sac. Moreover, the device struts act as a nidus for endothelial cell growth across the aneurysm neck ultimately leading to aneurysm exclusion from the circulation. In silico computational analyses and investigations in preclinical animal models have provided valuable insights into the underlying biological basis for flow diverter therapy. Here, we review the present understanding pertaining to flow diverter biology and mechanisms of action, focusing on stent design, induction of intra-aneurysmal thrombosis, endothelialization, and alterations in hemodynamics.

Background Endoscopic resection (ER) for uncommon sinonasal malignancies (SNMs) has been reported to confer superior surgical outcomes compared to open resection (OR) based on indirect comparisons of limited evidence. Objective The aim of this study was to pool all direct comparative studies in the literature to validate this potential superior association. Methods Systematic searches of 7 electronic databases from their inception to April 2019 were conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. There were 1001 articles identified for screening. Outcomes of interest were pooled as risk ratios (RRs) and mean difference (MD) and analyzed using a random-effects model. Results There were 10 studies included in this meta-analysis, with 900 SNM patients in total where ER and OR were utilized in 399 (44%) and 501 (56%) cases, respectively. Compared to OR, random-effects (RE) modeling indicated ER resulted in statistically comparable complications (RR = 0.68; P-effect = .12) and recurrence (RR = 0.84; P-effect = .35). ER was associated with significantly shorter length of stay (LOS) compared to OR (MD = −2.9 days; P-effect <.01). Conclusions The use of ER to manage SNM was associated with significantly favorable reduction in LOS compared to OR. However, with respect to other surgical outcomes and recurrence, the current literature does not indicate either ER or OR as statistically superior. Therefore, until greater validation of these associations can be proven, expectations that ER for SNMs confers superior surgical outcomes compared to OR should be tempered.