Vin-Cent Wu, Tao-Min Huang, Chih-Chung Shiao, Chun-Fu Lai, Pi-Ru Tsai, Wei-Jie Wang, Hui-Yu Huang, Kuo-Chuan Wang, Wen-Je Ko, Kwan-Dun Wu and NSARF Group
Hemodynamic instability occurs frequently during dialysis treatment and remains a significant cause of patient morbidity and mortality, especially in patients with brain hemorrhage. This study aims to compare the effects of hemodynamic parameters and intracranial pressure (ICP) between sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED) and continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH) in dialysis patients with brain hemorrhage.
End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients with brain hemorrhage undergoing ICP monitoring were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive CVVH or SLED on the 1st day and were changed to the other modality on the 2nd day. The ultrafiltration rate was set at between 1.0 kg/8 hrs and 1.5 kg/8 hrs according to the patient's fluid status. The primary study end point was the change in hemodynamics and ICP during the dialytic periods. The secondary end point was the difference between cardiovascular peptides and oxidative and inflammatory assays.
Ten patients (6 women; mean age 59.9 ± 3.6 years) were analyzed. The stroke volume variation was higher with SLED than CVVH (generalized estimating equations method, p = 0.031). The ICP level increased after both SLED and CVVH (time effect, p = 0.003) without significant difference between modalities. The dialysis dose quantification after 8-hour dialysis was higher in SLED than CVVH (equivalent urea clearance by convection, 62.7 ± 4.4 vs 50.2 ± 3.9 ml/min; p = 0.002). Additionally, the endothelin-1 level increased after CVVH treatment (p = 0.019) but not SLED therapy.
With this controlled crossover study, the authors provide the pilot evidence that both SLED and CVVH display identical acute hemodynamic effects and increased ICP after dialysis in brain hemorrhage patients. Clinical trial registration no.: NCT01781585 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
Tsz Wai Yeung, Vincent Lai, Hin Yue Lau, Wai Lun Poon, Chong Boon Tan and Yiu Chung Wong
Use of a flow-diverting device has shown promising short-term results in the management of vertebral artery (VA) dissecting aneurysms, but there is still uncertainty regarding its long-term efficacy and safety. The authors report their initial experience with respect to the potential utility and long-term clinical outcomes of using a flow-diverting device in the treatment of unruptured dissecting VA aneurysms.
The authors conducted a retrospective review of all cases of unruptured intracranial VA dissecting aneurysms treated at their institution (Tuen Mun Hospital) with a flow-diverting device. They describe the clinical presentations and angiographic features of the cases and report the clinical outcome (with modified Rankin Scale [mRS] scores) at most recent follow-up, as well as results of the latest angiographic assessment, with particular focus on in-stent patency and side-branch occlusion.
A total of 4 aneurysms were successfully obliterated by using flow-diverting devices alone. Two devices were deployed in a telescoping fashion in each of 2 aneurysms, whereas only 1 device was inserted in each of the other 2 aneurysms. No periprocedural complication was encountered. No patient showed any angiographic evidence of recurrence, in-stent thrombosis, or side-branch occlusion in angiographic reassessment at a mean of 22 months after treatment (range 18–24 months). As of the most recent clinical follow-up (mean 30 months after treatment, range 24–37 months), all patients had favorable outcomes (mRS Score 0).
Reconstruction using a flow-diverting device is an attractive alternative in definitive treatment of dissecting VA aneurysms, demonstrating favorable long-term clinical and angiographic outcomes and the ability to maintain parent artery and side-branch patency. It is particularly useful in cases with eloquent side-branch or dominant VA involvement.