Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2023
Vasospasm secondary to responsive neurostimulator placement: a previously unreported complication. Illustrative case.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rogowski Brandon, Miller Aaron, Saway Brian F, Wessell Jeffrey, Rowland Nathan C, Lena Jonathan Ross, Vandergrift William A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Responsive Neurostimulation (RNS) system is an implantable device for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who are not candidates for resection of a seizure focus. As a relatively new therapeutic, the full spectrum of adverse effects has yet to be determined. A literature review revealed no previous reports of cerebral vasospasm following RNS implantation.
OBSERVATIONS: A 35-year-old man developed severe angiographic and clinical vasospasm following bilateral mesial temporal lobe RNS implantation. He initially presented with concerns for status epilepticus 8 days after implantation. On hospital day 3, a decline in his clinical examination prompted imaging studies that revealed a left middle cerebral artery (MCA) stroke with angiographic evidence of severe vasospasm of the left internal carotid artery (ICA), MCA, anterior cerebral artery (ACA), and right ICA and ACA. Despite improvements in angiographic vasospasm after appropriate treatment, a thrombus developed in the posterior M2 branch, requiring mechanical thrombectomy. Ultimately, the patient was stabilized and discharged to a rehabilitation facility with residual cognitive and motor deficits.
LESSONS: Cerebral vasospasm as a cause of ischemic stroke after uneventful RNS implantation is exceedingly rare, yet demands particular attention given the potential for severe consequences and the growing number of patients receiving RNS devices.
OBSERVATIONS: A 35-year-old man developed severe angiographic and clinical vasospasm following bilateral mesial temporal lobe RNS implantation. He initially presented with concerns for status epilepticus 8 days after implantation. On hospital day 3, a decline in his clinical examination prompted imaging studies that revealed a left middle cerebral artery (MCA) stroke with angiographic evidence of severe vasospasm of the left internal carotid artery (ICA), MCA, anterior cerebral artery (ACA), and right ICA and ACA. Despite improvements in angiographic vasospasm after appropriate treatment, a thrombus developed in the posterior M2 branch, requiring mechanical thrombectomy. Ultimately, the patient was stabilized and discharged to a rehabilitation facility with residual cognitive and motor deficits.
LESSONS: Cerebral vasospasm as a cause of ischemic stroke after uneventful RNS implantation is exceedingly rare, yet demands particular attention given the potential for severe consequences and the growing number of patients receiving RNS devices.