Key result
Preexisting CMB burden over two linked to ~3.6-fold higher odds of new remote CMBs after thrombolysis.
Observational (n=741)
Yes
OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency, associated factors, and underlying vasculopathy of new remote cerebral microbleeds (CMB), as well as the risk of concomitant hemorrhagic complications related to new CMBs, after IV thrombolysis (IVT) in acute stroke patients. METHODS: We conducted an observational study using data from our local thrombolysis registry. We included consecutive stroke patients with MRI (3T)-based IVT and a follow-up MRI the next day between 2008 and 2017 (n = 396). Only CMBs located outside of the ischemic lesions were considered. We also performed a meta-analysis on new CMBs after IVT that included 2 additional studies. In the random-effects meta-analysis (n = 741), the pooled cumulative frequency of new CMBs after IVT was 4.4%. A higher preexisting CMB burden (>2) was associated with a higher likelihood of new CMBs (odds ratio [OR] 3.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-10.3) and new CMBs were associated with the occurrence of remote parenchymal hemorrhage (OR 28.8, 95% CI 8.6-96.4). CONCLUSIONS: New remote CMBs after IVT occurred in 4% of stroke patients, mainly had a strictly lobar distribution, and were associated with IVT-related hemorrhagic complications. Preexisting CMBs with a strictly lobar distribution and a higher CMB burden were associated with new CMBs after IVT, which may indicate an underlying cerebral amyloid angiopathy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Braemswig et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Acute ischemic stroke (n=741). Higher preexisting cerebral microbleed (CMB) burden (>2) vs. Lower or no preexisting CMB burden was evaluated on New remote cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.3-10.3). A preexisting cerebral microbleed (CMB) burden >2 was associated with a higher likelihood of new remote CMBs after IV thrombolysis for ischemic stroke (OR 3.6; 95% CI 1.3-10.3).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: