We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
Dissection of Cervical and Cerebral Arteries.
Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports 2017 August
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We aimed to summarize recent findings in cervical (CeAD) and intracranial artery dissection (IAD) research.
RECENT FINDINGS: Considered a disease of the young- and middle-aged, an analysis on the largest CeAD-population to date (n = 2391) revealed that about 1 of 14 CeAD-patients was aged ≥60 years. Distinct genetic variants were associated with CeAD. However, in clinical practice, genetic investigations are not helpful due to the small effect size. Despite the paucity of data from randomized-controlled trials in CeAD-stroke patients, both intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular treatment should be considered as acute treatment in such patients. Future research is needed to clarify which patients benefit most from each treatment modality. Whether to use antiplatelets or anticoagulants in stroke prevention in CeAD-patients is still a matter of debate. One randomized-controlled feasibility trial has been published, and another trial designed to show non-inferiority of aspirin to vitamin-K-antagonists is underway and will be terminated in late 2018. Non-vitamin-K-oral anticoagulants should not be used in CeAD outside a properly designed trial, as experience with these drugs in CeAD-patients is limited. With many IAD patients developing intracranial hemorrhage, antithrombotic therapy should be used with caution. Knowledge about CeAD and IAD has advanced substantially. Nevertheless, further research is mandatory, in particular regarding pathophysiology, acute treatment, and stroke-preventive therapy, as well as long-term outcome and prognosis.
RECENT FINDINGS: Considered a disease of the young- and middle-aged, an analysis on the largest CeAD-population to date (n = 2391) revealed that about 1 of 14 CeAD-patients was aged ≥60 years. Distinct genetic variants were associated with CeAD. However, in clinical practice, genetic investigations are not helpful due to the small effect size. Despite the paucity of data from randomized-controlled trials in CeAD-stroke patients, both intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular treatment should be considered as acute treatment in such patients. Future research is needed to clarify which patients benefit most from each treatment modality. Whether to use antiplatelets or anticoagulants in stroke prevention in CeAD-patients is still a matter of debate. One randomized-controlled feasibility trial has been published, and another trial designed to show non-inferiority of aspirin to vitamin-K-antagonists is underway and will be terminated in late 2018. Non-vitamin-K-oral anticoagulants should not be used in CeAD outside a properly designed trial, as experience with these drugs in CeAD-patients is limited. With many IAD patients developing intracranial hemorrhage, antithrombotic therapy should be used with caution. Knowledge about CeAD and IAD has advanced substantially. Nevertheless, further research is mandatory, in particular regarding pathophysiology, acute treatment, and stroke-preventive therapy, as well as long-term outcome and prognosis.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app