Title |
Aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage from a neuroimaging perspective
|
---|---|
Published in |
Critical Care, November 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/s13054-014-0557-2 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Airton Leonardo de Oliveira Manoel, Ann Mansur, Amanda Murphy, David Turkel-Parrella, Matt Macdonald, R Loch Macdonald, Walter Montanera, Thomas R Marotta, Aditya Bharatha, Khaled Effendi, Tom A Schweizer |
Abstract |
Neuroimaging is a key element in the management of patients suffering from subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH). In this article, we review the current literature to provide a summary of the existing neuroimaging methods available in clinical practice. Noncontrast computed tomography is highly sensitive in detecting subarachnoid blood, especially within 6 hours of haemorrhage. However, lumbar puncture should follow a negative noncontrast computed tomography scan in patients with symptoms suspicious of SAH. Computed tomography angiography is slowly replacing digital subtraction angiography as the first-line technique for the diagnosis and treatment planning of cerebral aneurysms, but digital subtraction angiography is still required in patients with diffuse SAH and negative initial computed tomography angiography. Delayed cerebral ischaemia is a common and serious complication after SAH. The modern concept of delayed cerebral ischaemia monitoring is shifting from modalities that measure vessel diameter to techniques focusing on brain perfusion. Lastly, evolving modalities applied to assess cerebral physiological, functional and cognitive sequelae after SAH, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging or positron emission tomography, are discussed. These new techniques may have the advantage over structural modalities due to their ability to assess brain physiology and function in real time. However, their use remains mainly experimental and the literature supporting their practice is still scarce. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Japan | 2 | 15% |
United Kingdom | 2 | 15% |
Greece | 1 | 8% |
Netherlands | 1 | 8% |
Unknown | 7 | 54% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 8 | 62% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 23% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 2 | 1% |
Mexico | 1 | <1% |
Poland | 1 | <1% |
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 144 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Other | 21 | 14% |
Student > Postgraduate | 19 | 13% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 10% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 10% |
Student > Master | 12 | 8% |
Other | 32 | 21% |
Unknown | 35 | 23% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 77 | 52% |
Neuroscience | 15 | 10% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 5% |
Arts and Humanities | 2 | 1% |
Psychology | 2 | 1% |
Other | 4 | 3% |
Unknown | 42 | 28% |