Advertisement

Dissection of Cervical and Cerebral Arteries

  • Stefan T. EngelterEmail author
  • Christopher Traenka
  • Philippe Lyrer
Stroke (H Diener, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Stroke

Abstract

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.

Summary

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.

Keywords

Cervical artery dissection Intracranial artery dissection Ischemic stroke 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Stefan T. Engelter has received funding for travel or speaker honoraria from Bayer and Boehringer Ingelheim; he has served on scientific advisory boards for Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS/Pfizer, and Covidien and on the editorial board of Stroke. He has received an educational grant from Pfizer and research support from the Science Funds (Wissenschaftsfonds) of the University Hospital Basel, the University Basel, the Swiss Heart Foundation, and the Swiss National Science Foundation.

Christopher Traenka has received funding from the Swiss Heart Foundation and was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation and has been granted research support from the University Basel.

Philippe Lyrer has served on scientific advisory boards for Bayer Schering Pharma and Boehringer Ingelheim; has received funding for travel or speaker honoraria from Bayer Schering Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Shire plc; serves as coeditor for Neurologie und Psychiatrie and on the editorial board of Swiss Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry; and has received research support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Sanofi-Aventis, PhotoThera, the Swiss National Science Foundation, and the Swiss Heart Foundation.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Engelter ST, Traenka C, Von Hessling A, Lyrer PA. Diagnosis and treatment of cervical artery dissection. Neurol Clin. 2015;33(2):421–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Debette S. Pathophysiology and risk factors of cervical artery dissection: what have we learnt from large hospital-based cohorts? Curr Opin Neurol. 2014;27(1):20–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee VH, Brown RD Jr, Mandrekar JN, Mokri B. Incidence and outcome of cervical artery dissection: a population-based study. Neurology. 2006;67(10):1809–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anderson RM, Schechter MM. A case of spontaneous dissecting aneurysm of the internal carotid artery. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1959;22:195–201.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bejot Y, Daubail B, Debette S, Durier J, Giroud M. Incidence and outcome of cerebrovascular events related to cervical artery dissection: the Dijon stroke registry. Int J Stroke : Off J Int Stroke Soc. 2014;9(7):879–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Debette S, Metso TM, Pezzini A, Engelter ST, Leys D, Lyrer P, et al. CADISP-genetics: an International project searching for genetic risk factors of cervical artery dissections. Int J Stroke: Off J Int Stroke Soc. 2009;4(3):224–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Volker W, Dittrich R, Grewe S, Nassenstein I, Csiba L, Herczeg L, et al. The outer arterial wall layers are primarily affected in spontaneous cervical artery dissection. Neurology. 2011;76(17):1463–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Debette S, Grond-Ginsbach C, Bodenant M, Kloss M, Engelter S, Metso T, et al. Differential features of carotid and vertebral artery dissections: the CADISP study. Neurology. 2011;77(12):1174–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Engelter ST, Brandt T, Debette S, Caso V, Lichy C, Pezzini A, et al. Antiplatelets versus anticoagulation in cervical artery dissection. Stroke; J Cereb Circ. 2007;38(9):2605–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    •• Debette S, Compter A, Labeyrie MA, Uyttenboogaart M, Metso TM, Majersik JJ, et al. Epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of intracranial artery dissection. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14(6):640–54. This comprehensive and highly important review highlights the most current evidence on IAD research CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ono H, Nakatomi H, Tsutsumi K, Inoue T, Teraoka A, Yoshimoto Y, et al. Symptomatic recurrence of intracranial arterial dissections: follow-up study of 143 consecutive cases and pathological investigation. Stroke; J Cereb Circ. 2013;44(1):126–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mizutani T, Kojima H, Asamoto S, Miki Y. Pathological mechanism and three-dimensional structure of cerebral dissecting aneurysms. J Neurosurg. 2001;94(5):712–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bejot Y, Daubail B, Jacquin A, Durier J, Osseby GV, Rouaud O, et al. Trends in the incidence of ischaemic stroke in young adults between 1985 and 2011: the Dijon stroke registry. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2014;85(5):509–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Metso TM, Debette S, Grond-Ginsbach C, Engelter ST, Leys D, Brandt T, et al. Age-dependent differences in cervical artery dissection. J Neurol. 2012;259(10):2202–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schievink WI, Mokri B, Whisnant JP. Internal carotid artery dissection in a community. Rochester, Minnesota, 1987-1992. Stroke; J Cereb Circ. 1993;24(11):1678–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leys D, Bandu L, Henon H, Lucas C, Mounier-Vehier F, Rondepierre P, et al. Clinical outcome in 287 consecutive young adults (15 to 45 years) with ischemic stroke. Neurology. 2002;59(1):26–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nedeltchev K, der Maur TA, Georgiadis D, Arnold M, Caso V, Mattle HP, et al. Ischaemic stroke in young adults: predictors of outcome and recurrence. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2005;76(2):191–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Metso AJ, Metso TM, Debette S, Dallongeville J, Lyrer PA, Pezzini A, et al. Gender and cervical artery dissection. Eur J Neurol: Off J Eur Fed Neurol Soc. 2012;19(4):594–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Engelter ST, Grond-Ginsbach C, Metso TM, Metso AJ, Kloss M, Debette S, et al. Cervical artery dissection: trauma and other potential mechanical trigger events. Neurology. 2013;80(21):1950–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schievink WI. Spontaneous dissection of the carotid and vertebral arteries. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(12):898–906.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    •• Traenka C, Dougoud D, Simonetti BG, Metso TM, Debette S, Pezzini A, et al. Cervical artery dissection in patients >/=60 years: Often painless, few mechanical triggers. Neurology. 2017;88(14):1313–20. This very recent article highlights clinical and vascular features as well as outcome in CeAD patients aged >60 years, a patient group in which CeAD is mostly unexpected.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Debette S, Goeggel Simonetti B, Schilling S, Martin JJ, Kloss M, Sarikaya H, et al. Familial occurrence and heritable connective tissue disorders in cervical artery dissection. Neurology. 2014;83(22):2023–31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Debette S, Leys D. Cervical-artery dissections: predisposing factors, diagnosis, and outcome. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8(7):668–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    • Lyrer PA, Brandt T, Metso TM, Metso AJ, Kloss M, Debette S, et al. Clinical import of Horner syndrome in internal carotid and vertebral artery dissection. Neurology. 2014;82(18):1653–9. The authors investigate the importance of a very common clinical and local sign of CeAD: Horner syndrome.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kellert L, Kloss M, Pezzini A, Debette S, Leys D, Caso V, et al. Prognostic significance of pulsatile tinnitus in cervical artery dissection. Eur J Neurol: Off J Eur Fed Neurol Soc. 2016;23(7):1183–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Baumgartner RW, Arnold M, Baumgartner I, Mosso M, Gonner F, Studer A, et al. Carotid dissection with and without ischemic events: local symptoms and cerebral artery findings. Neurology. 2001;57(5):827–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Arnold M, Bousser MG, Fahrni G, Fischer U, Georgiadis D, Gandjour J, et al. Vertebral artery dissection: presenting findings and predictors of outcome. Stroke; J Cereb Circ. 2006;37(10):2499–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Larsson SC, King A, Madigan J, Levi C, Norris JW, Markus HS. Prognosis of carotid dissecting aneurysms: results from CADISS and a systematic review. Neurology. 2017;88(7):646–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Metso TM, Tatlisumak T, Debette S, Dallongeville J, Engelter ST, Lyrer PA, et al. Migraine in cervical artery dissection and ischemic stroke patients. Neurology. 2012;78(16):1221–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    De Giuli V, Grassi M, Lodigiani C, Patella R, Zedde M, Gandolfo C, et al. Association Between Migraine and Cervical Artery Dissection: The Italian Project on Stroke in Young Adults. JAMA Neurol. 2017.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kloss M, Metso A, Pezzini A, Leys D, Giroud M, Metso TM, et al. Towards understanding seasonal variability in cervical artery dissection (CeAD). J Neurol. 2012;259(8):1662–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Paciaroni M, Georgiadis D, Arnold M, Gandjour J, Keseru B, Fahrni G, et al. Seasonal variability in spontaneous cervical artery dissection. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2006;77(5):677–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Debette S, Metso T, Pezzini A, Abboud S, Metso A, Leys D, et al. Association of vascular risk factors with cervical artery dissection and ischemic stroke in young adults. Circulation. 2011;123(14):1537–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Grond-Ginsbach C, Debette S. The association of connective tissue disorders with cervical artery dissections. Curr Mol Med. 2009;9(2):210–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    •• Debette S, Kamatani Y, Metso TM, Kloss M, Chauhan G, Engelter ST, et al. Common variation in PHACTR1 is associated with susceptibility to cervical artery dissection. Nat Genet. 2015;47(1):78–83. In this important work, the authors identified distinct genetic variations associated with the occurrence of CeAD.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    •• Grond-Ginsbach C, Chen B, Krawczak M, Pjontek R, Ginsbach P, Yanxiang J, et al. Genetic imbalance in patients with cervical artery dissection current genomics. 2017;17. The authors identified certain copy number variants present in CeAD patients compared to control patients.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Grond-Ginsbach C, Brandt T, Kloss M, Aksay SS, Lyrer P, Traenka C, et al. Next generation sequencing analysis of patients with familial cervical artery dissection. Eur Stroke J 2017;1–7.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Emberson J, Lees KR, Lyden P, Blackwell L, Albers G, Bluhmki E, et al. Effect of treatment delay, age, and stroke severity on the effects of intravenous thrombolysis with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. Lancet. 2014;384(9958):1929–35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jauch EC, Saver JL, Adams HP Jr, Bruno A, Connors JJ, Demaerschalk BM, et al. Guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke; J Cereb Circ. 2013;44(3):870–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Powers WJ, Derdeyn CP, Biller J, Coffey CS, Hoh BL, Jauch EC, et al. American Heart Association/American Stroke Association focused update of the 2013 guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke regarding endovascular treatment: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke; J Cereb Circ. 2015;46(10):3020–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kamp TJ, Goldschmidt-Clermont PJ, Brinker JA, Resar JR. Myocardial infarction, aortic dissection, and thrombolytic therapy. Am Heart J. 1994;128(6 Pt 1):1234–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lee CH, Lim J. Type a aortic dissection: a hidden and lethal cause for failed thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction. BMJ Case Rep. 2009;2009:bcr2006100156.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Engelter ST, Dallongeville J, Kloss M, Metso TM, Leys D, Brandt T, et al. Thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection—data from the cervical artery dissection and Ischaemic stroke patients (CADISP) database. Eur J Neurol : Off J Eur Fed Neurol Soc. 2012;19(9):1199–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Engelter ST, Rutgers MP, Hatz F, Georgiadis D, Fluri F, Sekoranja L, et al. Intravenous thrombolysis in stroke attributable to cervical artery dissection. Stroke; J Cereb Circ. 2009;40(12):3772–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    •• Haussen DC, Jadhav A, Jovin T, Grossberg JA, Grigoryan M, Nahab F, et al. Endovascular management vs intravenous thrombolysis for acute stroke secondary to carotid artery dissection: local experience and systematic review. Neurosurgery. 2016;78(5):709–16. This article represents one of the most recent reports on EVT use in CeAD patients.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Berkhemer OA, Fransen PS, Beumer D, van den Berg LA, Lingsma HF, Yoo AJ, et al. A randomized trial of intraarterial treatment for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(1):11–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Saver JL, Goyal M, Bonafe A, Diener HC, Levy EI, Pereira VM, et al. Stent-retriever thrombectomy after intravenous t-PA vs. t-PA alone in stroke. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(24):2285–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Jovin TG, Chamorro A, Cobo E, de Miquel MA, Molina CA, Rovira A, et al. Thrombectomy within 8 hours after symptom onset in ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(24):2296–306.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Goyal M, Demchuk AM, Menon BK, Eesa M, Rempel JL, Thornton J, et al. Randomized assessment of rapid endovascular treatment of ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(11):1019–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    •• Campbell BC, Mitchell PJ, Kleinig TJ, Dewey HM, Churilov L, Yassi N, et al. Endovascular therapy for ischemic stroke with perfusion-imaging selection. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(11):1009–18. These articles—references 46–50—represent the most recent evidence on EVT use in ischemic stroke patients, showing superiority of EVT (compared to IVT alone) in anterior circulation stroke.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kurre W, Bansemir K, Aguilar Perez M, Martinez Moreno R, Schmid E, Bazner H, et al. Endovascular treatment of acute internal carotid artery dissections: technical considerations, clinical and angiographic outcome. Neuroradiology. 2016;58(12):1167–79.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Marnat G, Mourand I, Eker O, Machi P, Arquizan C, Riquelme C, et al. Endovascular Management of Tandem Occlusion Stroke Related to internal carotid artery dissection using a distal to proximal approach: insight from the RECOST study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016;37(7):1281–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    •• Moon K, Albuquerque FC, Cole T, Gross BA, McDougall CG. Stroke prevention by endovascular treatment of carotid and vertebral artery dissections. J Neurointerv Surg. 2016. In these recent articles—references 51–53—authors report on the use of different EVT techniques in patients with ischemic stroke attributable to CeAD.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Arnold M, Nedeltchev K, Sturzenegger M, Schroth G, Loher TJ, Stepper F, et al. Thrombolysis in patients with acute stroke caused by cervical artery dissection: analysis of 9 patients and review of the literature. Archives of neurology. 2002;59(4):549–53.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Lavallee PC, Mazighi M, Saint-Maurice JP, Meseguer E, Abboud H, Klein IF, et al. Stent-assisted endovascular thrombolysis versus intravenous thrombolysis in internal carotid artery dissection with tandem internal carotid and middle cerebral artery occlusion. Stroke; a journal of cerebral circulation. 2007;38(8):2270–4.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Baumgartner RW, Georgiadis D, Nedeltchev K, Schroth G, Sarikaya H, Arnold M. Stent-assisted endovascular thrombolysis versus intravenous thrombolysis in internal carotid artery dissection with tandem internal carotid and middle cerebral artery occlusion. Stroke; a journal of cerebral circulation. 2008;39(2):e27–8.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Vergouwen MD, Beentjes PA, Nederkoorn PJ. Thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke due to arterial extracranial dissection. European journal of neurology: the official journal of the European Federation of Neurological Societies. 2009;16(5):646–9.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Lin J, Sun Y, Zhao S, Xu J, Zhao C. Safety and efficacy of thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection-related ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2016;42(3–4):272–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Zangerle A, Kiechl S, Spiegel M, Furtner M, Knoflach M, Werner P, et al. Recanalization after thrombolysis in stroke patients: predictors and prognostic implications. Neurology. 2007;68(1):39–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Morris NA, Merkler AE, Gialdini G, Kamel H. Timing of incident stroke risk after cervical artery dissection presenting without ischemia. Stroke; J Cereb Circ. 2017;48(3):551–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Menon R, Kerry S, Norris JW, Markus HS. Treatment of cervical artery dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2008;79(10):1122–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Lyrer P, Engelter S. Antithrombotic drugs for carotid artery dissection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;10:CD000255.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Kennedy F, Lanfranconi S, Hicks C, Reid J, Gompertz P, Price C, et al. Antiplatelets vs anticoagulation for dissection: CADISS nonrandomized arm and meta-analysis. Neurology. 2012;79(7):686–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Sarikaya H, da Costa BR, Baumgartner RW, Duclos K, Touze E, de Bray JM, et al. Antiplatelets versus anticoagulants for the treatment of cervical artery dissection: Bayesian meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2013;8(9):e72697.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Chowdhury MM, Sabbagh CN, Jackson D, Coughlin PA, Ghosh J. Antithrombotic treatment for acute extracranial carotid artery dissections: a meta-analysis. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2015;50(2):148–56.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Investigators CT, Markus HS, Hayter E, Levi C, Feldman A, Venables G, et al. Antiplatelet treatment compared with anticoagulation treatment for cervical artery dissection (CADISS): a randomised trial. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14(4):361–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Cervical Artery Dissection in Stroke Study Trial I. Antiplatelet therapy vs. anticoagulation in cervical artery dissection: rationale and design of the Cervical Artery Dissection in Stroke Study (CADISS). Int J Stroke: Off J Int Stroke Soc. 2007;2(4):292–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Gensicke H, Ahlhelm F, Jung S, von Hessling A, Traenka C, Goeggel Simonetti B, et al. New ischaemic brain lesions in cervical artery dissection stratified to antiplatelets or anticoagulants. European journal of neurology: the official journal of the European Federation of Neurological Societies. 2015;22(5):859–65. e61 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Srinivasan J, Newell DW, Sturzenegger M, Mayberg MR, Winn HR. Transcranial Doppler in the evaluation of internal carotid artery dissection. Stroke; a journal of cerebral circulation. 1996;27(7):1226–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E, Hoffman EB, Deenadayalu N, Ezekowitz MD, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet. 2014;383(9921):955–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, Pan G, Singer DE, Hacke W, et al. Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(10):883–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, Eikelboom J, Oldgren J, Parekh A, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(12):1139–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Connolly SJ, Eikelboom J, Joyner C, Diener HC, Hart R, Golitsyn S, et al. Apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(9):806–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Granger CB, Alexander JH, McMurray JJ, Lopes RD, Hylek EM, Hanna M, et al. Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(11):981–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Giugliano RP, Ruff CT, Braunwald E, Murphy SA, Wiviott SD, Halperin JL, et al. Edoxaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(22):2093–104.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Kate M, Gioia L, Buck B, Sivakumar L, Jeerakathil T, Shuaib A, et al. Dabigatran therapy in acute ischemic stroke patients without atrial fibrillation. Stroke; a journal of cerebral circulation. 2015;46(9):2685–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Mustanoja S, Metso TM, Putaala J, Heikkinen N, Haapaniemi E, Salonen O, et al. Helsinki experience on nonvitamin K oral anticoagulants for treating cervical artery dissection. Brain Behav. 2015;5(8):e00349.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Caprio FZ, Bernstein RA, Alberts MJ, Curran Y, Bergman D, Korutz AW, et al. Efficacy and safety of novel oral anticoagulants in patients with cervical artery dissections. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2014;38(4):247–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Metso TM, Metso AJ, Helenius J, Haapaniemi E, Salonen O, Porras M, et al. Prognosis and safety of anticoagulation in intracranial artery dissections in adults. Stroke; a journal of cerebral circulation. 2007;38(6):1837–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Kai Y, Nishi T, Watanabe M, Morioka M, Hirano T, Yano S, et al. Strategy for treating unruptured vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms. Neurosurgery. 2011;69(5):1085–91. discussion 91-2 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan T. Engelter
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Christopher Traenka
    • 1
  • Philippe Lyrer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Neurology and Stroke CenterUniversity Hospital Basel and University of BaselBaselSwitzerland
  2. 2.Neurorehabilitation UnitUniversity of Basel and University Center for Medicine of Aging and Rehabilitation, Felix Platter HospitalBaselSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations