Predictors of 1-year outcome after coiling for poor-grade subarachnoid aneurysmal hemorrhage
To describe features in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) for poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) and to identify predictors of 12-month outcome.
We conducted a controlled observational study of 51 consecutive patients treated with endovascular coiling within 96 h of rupture for poor-grade aneurysmal SAH (20 men and 31 women, age 54 ± 12 years). We recorded co-morbidities; initial severity; aneurysm location; occurrence of acute hydrocephalus, initial seizures, and/or neurogenic lung edema; troponin values, Fisher grade; computed tomography (CT) findings; treatment intensity; and occurrence of vasospasm. The brain injury marker S100B was assayed daily over the first 8 days. Glasgow Outcome Scores (GOS) were recorded at ICU discharge, at 6 and 12 months. The main outcome criterion was the 1-year GOS score, which we used to classify patients as having a poor outcome (GOS 1–3) or a good outcome (GOS 4–5).
Overall, clinical status after 1 year was very good (GOS 5) in 41% of patients and good (GOS 4) in 16%. Neither baseline characteristics nor interventions differed significantly between patients with good outcome (GOS 4–5) and those with poor outcome (GOS 1–3). Persistent intracranial pressure elevation and higher mean 8-day S100B value significantly and independently predicted the 1-year GOS outcome (P = 0.008 and P = 0.001, respectively).
Patients in poor clinical condition after SAH have more than a 50:50 chance of a favorable outcome after 1 year. High mean 8-day S100B value and persistent intracranial hypertension predict a poor outcome (GOS 1–3) after 1 year.
KeywordsIntracranial aneurysms Subarachnoid hemorrhage Poor-grade subarachnoid hemorrhage Coiling Outcome
- 1.Epidemiology of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage in Australia and New Zealand: incidence and case fatality from the Australasian Cooperative Research on Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Study (ACROSS). Stroke 2000;31(8):1843–50.Google Scholar
- 4.Drake C. Report of world federation of neurological surgeons comittee on a universal subarachnoid hemorrhage grading scale. J Neurosurg 1988;68:985–6.Google Scholar
- 5.Rosen DS, Macdonald RL. Grading of subarachnoid hemorrhage: modification of the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies scale on the basis of data for a large series of patients. Neurosurgery 2004;54(3):566–75; discussion 75–6.Google Scholar
- 7.van der Schaaf I, Algra A, Wermer M, et al. Endovascular coiling versus neurosurgical clipping for patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005(4):CD003085.Google Scholar
- 10.Korinek AM, Reina M, Boch AL, Rivera AO, De Bels D, Puybasset L. Prevention of external ventricular drain-related ventriculitis. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2005;147(1):39–45; discussion 6.Google Scholar
- 11.Okada Y, Shima T, Nishida M, et al. Comparison of transcranial Doppler investigation of aneurysmal vasospasm with digital subtraction angiographic and clinical findings. Neurosurgery 1999;45(3):443–9; discussion 9–50.Google Scholar
- 13.Arakawa Y, Kikuta K, Hojo M, Goto Y, Ishii A, Yamagata S. Milrinone for the treatment of cerebral vasospasm after subarachnoid hemorrhage: report of seven cases. Neurosurgery 2001;48(4):723–8; discussion 8–30.Google Scholar
- 22.Eide PK, Sorteberg W. Intracranial pressure levels and single wave amplitudes, Glasgow Coma Score and Glasgow Outcome Score after subarachnoid haemorrhage. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2006;148:1267–76.Google Scholar
- 33.Harrod CG, Bendok BR, Batjer HH. Prediction of cerebral vasospasm in patients presenting with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a review. Neurosurgery 2005;56(4):633–54; discussion 54.Google Scholar