Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author or Editor: Terhi Huttunen x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Heidi J. Nurmonen, Terhi Huttunen, Jukka Huttunen, Arttu Kurtelius, Satu Kotikoski, Antti Junkkari, Timo Koivisto, Mikael von und zu Fraunberg, Olli-Pekka Kämäräinen, Maarit Lång, Helena Isoniemi, Juha E. Jääskeläinen and Antti E. Lindgren

OBJECTIVE

The authors set out to study whether autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), an established risk factor for intracranial aneurysms (IAs), affects the acute course and long-term outcome of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH).

METHODS

The outcomes of 32 ADPKD patients with aSAH between 1980 and 2015 (median age 43 years; 50% women) were compared with 160 matched (age, sex, and year of aSAH) non-ADPKD aSAH patients in the prospectively collected Kuopio Intracranial Aneurysm Patient and Family Database.

RESULTS

At 12 months, 75% of the aSAH patients with ADPKD versus 71% of the matched-control aSAH patients without ADPKD had good outcomes (Glasgow Outcome Scale score 4 or 5). There was no significant difference in condition at admission. Hypertension had been diagnosed before aSAH in 69% of the ADPKD patients versus 27% of controls (p < 0.001). Multiple IAs were present in 44% of patients in the ADPKD group versus 25% in the control group (p = 0.03). The most common sites of ruptured IAs were the anterior communicating artery (47% vs 29%, p = 0.05) and the middle cerebral artery bifurcation (28% vs 31%), and the median size was 6.0 mm versus 8.0 mm (p = 0.02). During the median follow-up of 11 years, a second aSAH occurred in 3 of 29 (10%) ADPKD patients and in 4 of 131 (3%) controls (p = 0.11). A fatal second aSAH due to a confirmed de novo aneurysm occurred in 2 (6%) of the ADPKD patients but in none of the controls (p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes of ADPKD patients with aSAH did not differ significantly from those of matched non-ADPKD aSAH patients. ADPKD patients had an increased risk of second aSAH from a de novo aneurysm, warranting long-term angiographic follow-up.

Restricted access

Philippe De Vloo, Terhi J. Huttunen, Dalila Forte, Ivana Jankovic, Amy Lee, Mark Hair, Stephanie Cawker, Deepti Chugh, Lucinda Carr, Belinda H. A. Crowe, Matthew Pitt and Kristian Aquilina

OBJECTIVE

Selective dorsal rhizotomy (SDR) is effective at permanently reducing spasticity in children with spastic cerebral palsy. The value of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in this procedure remains controversial, and its robustness has been questioned. This study describes the authors’ institutional electrophysiological technique (based on the technique of Park et al.), intraoperative findings, robustness, value to the procedure, and occurrence of new motor or sphincter deficits.

METHODS

The authors analyzed electrophysiological data of all children who underwent SDR at their center between September 2013 and February 2019. All patients underwent bilateral SDR through a single-level laminotomy at the conus and with transection of about 60% of the L2–S2 afferent rootlets (guided by intraoperative electrophysiology) and about 50% of L1 afferent roots (nonselectively).

RESULTS

One hundred forty-five patients underwent SDR (64% male, mean age 6 years and 7 months, range 2 years and 9 months to 14 years and 10 months). Dorsal roots were distinguished from ventral roots anatomically and electrophysiologically, by assessing responses on free-running electromyography (EMG) and determining stimulation thresholds (≥ 0.2 mA in all dorsal rootlets). Root level was determined anatomically and electrophysiologically by assessing electromyographic response to stimulation. Median stimulation threshold was lower in sacral compared to lumbar roots (p < 0.001), and 16% higher on the first operated (right) side (p = 0.023), but unrelated to age, sex, or functional status. Similarly, responses to tetanic stimulation were consistent: 87% were graded 3+ or 4+, with similar distributions between sides. This was also unrelated to age, sex, and functional status. The L2–S2 rootlets were divided (median 60%, range 50%–67%), guided by response to tetanic stimulation at threshold amplitude. No new motor or sphincter deficits were observed, suggesting sparing of ventral roots and sphincteric innervation, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This electrophysiological technique appears robust and reproducible, allowing reliable identification of afferent nerve roots, definition of root levels, and guidance for rootlet division. Only a direct comparative study will establish whether intraoperative electrophysiology during SDR minimizes risk of new motor or sphincter worsening and/or maximizes functional outcome.