(Stroke. 2000;31:2511.)
© 2000 American Heart Association, Inc.
Comments, Opinions, and Reviews |
Surgery in Intracerebral Hemorrhage
The Uncertainty Continues
From the Regional Neurosciences Centre, Newcastle General Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, England.
Correspondence to Ward 31 North Wing, Regional Neurosciences Center, Newcastle General Hospital, Westgate Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE4 6BE UK. E-mail stich{at}ncl.ac.uk
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Background and Purpose—Primary intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) accounts for 10% to 20% of stroke but carries the highest rates of mortality and morbidity of all stroke subtypes. Current treatment, however, is varied and haphazard. The most recent Cochrane systematic review refers to 4 prospective, randomized controlled trials. We present a further meta-analysis to include 3 new trials. In addition, we review the trials of Chen et al and McKissock et al and discuss aspects of their quality that, we believe, prevent their inclusion in modern day meta-analysis.
Methods—Literature databases and articles were searched from 1966 to October 1999. Using the end points of death and dependency, the results of the 7 identified randomized trials were expressed as odds ratios. All available data were then analyzed with meta-analysis techniques. Analysis of relevant subsets of trials was also carried out.
Results—Meta-analysis of all 7 trials shows a trend toward a higher chance of death and dependency after surgery (OR 1.20; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.74). Meta-analysis was also carried out after exclusion of the Chen and McKissock trials for reasons discussed in the text. This meta-analysis suggests a benefit from surgery, with a reduction in the chances of death and dependency after surgical treatment by a factor of 0.63 (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.14).
Conclusions—When meta-analysis is restricted to modern-day, post-CT, well-constructed, balanced trials, a trend for surgery to reduce the chances of death and dependency is found. Perhaps, then, in the modern era of CT, good neuroanesthesia, intensive care, and the operating microscope, surgery has a role in the treatment of supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage. The results of a large, multicenter, randomized controlled trial are urgently needed, and the ongoing International Surgical Trial of Intracerebral Hemorrhage should fulfill this objective.
Key Words: intracerebral hemorrhage • meta-analysis • surgery
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Stroke remains a major cause of mortality and disability worldwide. Primary intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH; ie, ICH unrelated to aneurysm, arteriovenous malformation, trauma, or tumor) accounts for 10% to 20% of these episodes,1 but of all stroke subtypes carries the highest mortality and morbidity rate. It is also the most common type of stroke in the younger patient (aged
50 years).1
Despite this, there is no clear indication from the literature of the
optimal treatment of these patients, surgical or otherwise. Current
clinical practice seems varied and haphazard.2 Proper
evaluation of the role of surgery following spontaneous ICH should be
undertaken in the format of a prospective randomized controlled trial.
Indeed, several investigators3 4 5 6 have emphasized the need
for this as a matter of urgency. There are currently 7 published
randomized trials7 8 9 10 11 12 13 that have studied the surgical
evacuation of spontaneous ICH. The first, carried out in 1961 by
McKissock et al,7 shows no benefit from surgical
evacuation of hematoma and has had a strong influence on neurosurgical
practice, even to the present day. This is the largest trial
carried out to date. Trials by Juvela et al in 19899 and
Batjer et al in 199010 were too small to be conclusive. A
single trial by Auer et al published in 198911 found a
significant benefit from endoscopic evacuation of ICH. The only trial
to conclude that surgery is beneficial, it included 100 patients, 50
randomized to surgery. The results of 2 further small trials have
subsequently been published.12 13 Our search of the
literature also identified a trial of Chinese origin published by Chen
et al8 in 1992. This has been identified by
others,14 but to date has not been included in any
meta-analysis. A further randomized trial, recently finished in
the Netherlands, evaluates the role of thrombolytic
evacuation of ICH (Dr G. Blauw, unpublished data, 1999).
Meta-analyses of the first 4 trials are
available.6 14 15 16 We present a further
meta-analysis to include the 3 new trials and discuss
previously unrecognized information that may render previous
meta-analyses invalid. |
Subjects and Methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
MEDLINE and OVID databases were searched from 1966 to October 1999, using the medical subject heading terms "intracerebral hemorrhage," "brain hemorrhage," and "intracerebral hemorrhage and surgery." Reference lists of all the articles identified were examined, and relevant cited references were similarly reviewed. Although many nonrandomized studies were identified, they have been previously reviewed.6 Those previously identified randomized controlled trials were selected alongside 3 newly identified references. The inclusion/exclusion criteria of all 7 trials were studied alongside the diagnostic modalities used, the method of randomization, treatment methods, and the method of obtaining and classifying outcome. Using the end points of death and dependency, the results of the 7 identified trials were expressed as odds ratios with their associated 95% confidence intervals. All available data were then combined to be analyzed as a whole by using the well-established meta-analysis methods.17 18 Further analyses of relevant subsets of the identified trials were also carried out when it became clear on careful inspection of trial data that they may not be particularly homogenous.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
An elegant description of the relevant details of the previously meta-analyzed trials is already available6 and will not be repeated here. All identified trials, however, are presented in Table 1
. The
first randomized controlled trial carried out by McKissock et
al7 in 1961, however, deserves special mention. In this
study, 180 patients from a series of 303 patients in 2 central London
hospitals were randomized. Clinical examination, lumbar puncture, and
cerebral angiography established the diagnosis of ICH (this trial was
carried out in the era preceding CT), but patients were excluded from
the trial if they had rapidly improving signs or if an
aneurysm, arteriovenous malformation, or occluded cerebral
vessel was demonstrated on angiography. In addition, patients were
excluded where the hemorrhage was infratentorial or when the
diagnosis was uncertain and a tumor or abscess could not be excluded.
It is obvious, however, that without the diagnostic ability
of CT, despite the best efforts of the authors, patients without a
spontaneous ICH could have been randomized into the trial. Misdiagnosis
was, in fact, recognized in 4 patients in the surgical group. Two
patients were found to have negative ventriculograms, and in another 2
the ICH was actually found to be cerebellar in origin. Known errors
were also made in 5 of the medically treated patients. In 1 an
aneurysm was found at postmortem examination, in 2 a
delayed air study was negative, another patient was shown to have
massive infarction, and in the fifth a tumor was found to be the cause
of hemorrhage. Overall this gives a known
diagnostic error rate of 5%. Of further interest, and not
previously discussed, is the postrandomization selection of patients
for surgical treatment. Patients, once randomized, underwent
craniotomy and evacuation of hematoma as soon as the
hematoma could be localized. Localization, it is said in the
article, was possible in 60% of cases; in others, ventriculography was
performed, and craniotomy was carried out if the lesion
was accessible. In cases in which the hematoma was confined
to the basal ganglia and thalamus, craniotomy was
not performed (but such patients, nevertheless, quite
correctly remained in the operative group). It is not clear from the
article what proportion of the patients randomized to surgery actually
received the allocated treatment, but this trial was clearly primarily
a study of the surgical treatment of lobar hemorrhage. Perhaps
a significant proportion of patients randomized to surgery did not
actually receive their allocated treatment. While this may have been a
reasonable process in the 1960s, it does bring to question the validity
of the inclusion of these data in modern day meta-analysis for
other than the pre-CT diagnostic problems. Overall,
however, the results of this trial show a significant trend toward a
higher chance of death or dependency with surgery (OR 2.00; 95% CI
1.04 to 3.86). The next 3 trials, those of Auer et
al,11 Juvela et al,9 and Batjer et
al,10 are all carried out in the CT era and include
patients with basal ganglia and thalamic hematomas that are surgically
treated. ORs are shown in the Table.
|
An additional trial from the United States has recently been published. Morgenstern et al12 randomized 35 patients between surgery (craniotomy) and best medical treatment in a single center out of a group of 76 eligible patients. Patients were eligible if they presented within 3 hours of ictus (surgery was carried out within 12 hours of ictus) with an ICH, as shown on CT scan, of >9 mL that was lobar or deep in location and extended outside the thalamus. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score had to be between 5 and 15. Patients with a hematoma volume 10 to 19 mL and a GCS of 15 and better-than-antigravity strength on the affected side were excluded, as were patients with extensive intraventricular hemorrhage. Randomization was performed with the sealed envelope technique. In addition to the randomization treatment, all patients who presented with a GCS 9 or below underwent placement of an intracranial pressure (ICP) monitor and were treated with ventricular drainage, osmotic agents, hyperventilation, and paralysis to maintain the ICP below 21 cm H2O. Follow-up was performed at 30 days and at 6 months (mortality and Barthel score). No mention is made of how this information was obtained and whether it was obtained in a blinded fashion. Randomization groups were balanced for ICH volume and GCS. The surgical group was significantly more likely to have presented earlier after ictus and had fewer lobar hematomas. Mortality was lower in the surgical group (6%) than the medical group (24%) at 1 month but similar between groups at 6 months. Barthel Index scores were similar for the survivors. The results of this trial show a trend toward a lower chance of death or dependency with surgery, although the 95% CI does cross unity (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.11 to 1.88).
A randomized trial published in 1992 in the Acta Academiae Medicinae Shanghai, a Chinese journal,8 was identified. Translation from the native Chinese was necessary. From the translation we learn that Chen et al recruited 127 patients with a spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage as diagnosed by CT scan between 1986 and 1990. Patients were excluded if they required an emergency operation for herniation or showed "bad compliance" with the study. No further information is available on the latter part of this statement. Medical patients received therapy to control hypertension and decrease ICP. Patients assigned to surgery underwent stereotaxically guided hematoma clearance, craniectomy, or ventricular drainage. Patients were followed up at 1 and 3 months and graded on a 5-point scale: dead, poor, fair, good, and excellent. No indication is given of how this information was obtained. Sixty-four patients were randomized to surgery and 63 to medical treatment. The groups appear similar in terms of sex, age, and history of hypertension but differ significantly in level of consciousness (P<0.001), the size of the hematoma (P<0.001), and the presence of hemiplegia (P<0.01). Cerebellar hematomas, in addition, have been included. At 1 month the medical group is reported to have a statistically significantly higher rate of excellent outcomes (P<0.05), but no differences between the groups are reported at 3 months. The results of this trial show a trend toward a higher chance of death or dependency (assuming that "poor" and "fair" indicate dependency) with surgery, although the 95% CI again crosses unity (OR 1.66; 95% CI 0.82 to 3.34).
A further randomized trial13 has recently been published. In this feasibility study, 20 patients were randomized in a 24-month period, 9 to surgical intervention and 11 to medical treatment. Patients were eligible if they presented within 24 hours with a hematoma at least 10 mL in volume, had a GCS over 4, were at least 18 years of age, and had a neurological deficit secondary to their hemorrhage. Randomization was carried out with sealed opaque envelopes. Surgical technique was guided by that most appropriate to the hematoma and included craniotomy and stereotaxic aspiration. Medical treatment included mannitol, ventricular drainage, intubation if necessary, and hyperventilation if the ICP remained >20 mm Hg despite these other methods. Outcome was measured both at the time of discharge and at 3 months, with the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) score as the major end point. Other measures included the modified Rankin scale, mortality, the Barthel Index, and the National Institute of Health Stroke Severity (NIHSS) index. A nurse coordinator not involved in the treatment of patients performed the outcome evaluation. The surgical and medical groups were comparable with respect to baseline characteristics, GCS, median time from ictus to randomization, and ICH volume. There was no difference in mortality between the groups at 3 months (surgical group 22%, medical 27%). Similarly, there was no significant difference in mortality at 3 months. Analysis, however, of the other outcome measures showed a nonsignificant trend toward a better outcome in the surgical group versus the medical treatment group for median GOS, Barthel Index, and Rankin scale scores and a significant difference in the NIHSS (4 versus 14, P=0.04). The ORs of this trial indicate a tendency toward better outcome with surgery, although the 95% CIs are wide (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.09 to 2.69).
Systematic Overview
Previous meta-analyses of pooled results of the first 4
trials totaling a group of 349 patients (173 patients randomized to
surgical treatment) indicate a nonsignificant increase in the odds of
death and dependency at 6 months for patients treated surgically (OR
1.23; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.98).6 15 A further previous
meta-analysis looking at the end point of death only found a
statistically significant beneficial effect for surgery for
analysis of trials from the CT era only (to exclude the study
of McKissock et al7 ). The odds of death were reduced with
surgery by a factor of one half (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.38 to
1.44).16
With the data from the 3 new trials, we chose to perform a
meta-analysis in several different ways, based on the quality
and content of the various trials. Some difficulty in comparing data
from these 7 trials arises because the investigators have used
different measures to assess outcome and it is not clear whether they
provide equivalent assessments of the patients disability. We have
defined the following categories as disabled: in McKissock et
al,7 the total disability group, ie, "patients incapable
of taking care of themselves"; in Auer et al,11 those
"conscious patients totally dependent on others for activities of the
day"; in Batjer et al,10 those "dependent at home or
in an institution"; in Chen et al,8 those with a
"fair" or "poor" outcome; in Morgenstern et al,12
those with a Barthel score of 60; and in Juvela et al9
and Zuccarello et al,13 those with a GOS value of
"severely disabled."
Meta-analysis of all 7 trials to include that of McKissock et
al7 again shows a trend toward a higher chance of death
and dependency after surgery (OR 1.20; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.74; Figure 1). We have included patients randomized
to a third treatment arm of best medical management plus ICP monitoring
by Batjer et al10 within this analysis. They have
been excluded from the control group in meta-analysis by
previous authors,6 15 16 but this was recently amended in
a revision of the Cochrane Stroke Systematic Review.14
Analysis of all trials excluding the McKissock trial, however,
showed no real influence of either treatment, surgical or medical, with
an OR of 0.94 (95% CI 0.60 to 1.47; Figure 2).
|
|
Meta-analysis was also carried out of the 5 trials from
the post-CT era to exclude the trial available from China. The trial of
Chen et al8 presents some methodological difficulty,
given that we are relying on a translation of the published paper, with
no information from the unit directly. This translation suggests some
marked differences in the characteristics of operated and nonoperated
patients and the inclusion of cerebellar hematomas alongside
supratentorial bleeds. Surgical treatment may also
have included ventricular drainage for hydrocephalus only.
The results of this meta-analysis actually suggest some benefit
from surgery, with a reduction in the chances of death and dependency
after surgical treatment by a factor of 0.63 (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.35 to
1.14; Figure 3).
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Correct meta-analysis requires the possession of all the relevant studies. Invariably, a simple literature search is not enough, and on the basis of this we have been able to identify 1 previously unrecognized trial. In addition, as further studies are completed, formal repetition of the meta-analysis is imperative if we are to maintain our knowledge and offer our patients validated and proven treatments as soon as they are available.
Further study of the McKissock trial7 has identified flaws that differentiate it from the high standards of modern-day trial practice. We believe that these flaws should exclude it from modern-day systematic reviews. This is by no means a condemnation of the trial, which in its era was elegant, forward thinking, and well constructed, but a realization that as the diagnosis and treatment of any condition changes in time so does the relevance of studies carried out before that era. Thus, the meta-analysis reported here is carried out with and without the McKissock trial. Criticism can also be levied at the trial of Chen et al,8 identified from the Chinese literature. Although we know that publication bias acts to discourage the reporting of negative trials in the English literature or the literature at all, whether this trial is worthy of inclusion in a meta-analysis, given the important differences between treatment groups, is open to debate. Thus, one of our meta-analyses is again carried out with and without the Chen trial.
Although previous studies have evaluated the surgical effects of open craniotomy and endoscopy separately,6 15 we do not feel that this is a useful or relevant separation. From information collected from neurosurgeons in the United Kingdom,2 it would appear that many surgeons use differing methods of evacuation but endoscopic surgery per se is not common. Although eventually it may be important to study the relevant benefits of differing surgical methods, we feel that the overriding question at present is, Does surgery help? Perhaps if this can be shown, further work to establish what type of surgery is best will be more relevant.
We find it interesting that when meta-analysis is restricted to modern-day, post-CT, well-constructed, balanced trials, a trend for surgery to reduce the chances of death and dependency is found. This finding is in concurrence with a previous meta-analysis from which McKissock’s trial was excluded which found a trend toward improved mortality16 (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.92) and death and dependency19 (OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.38 to 1.44) with surgery. This meta-analysis pooled data from the studies of Juvela et al,9 Auer et al,11 and Batjer et al10 only.
Perhaps, then, in the modern era of CT, good neuroanesthesia, intensive care, and the operating microscope, surgery is beginning to find a therapeutic role in the treatment of supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage. Further trials, however, are badly and urgently needed. We are therefore pleased to report the ongoing International Surgical Trial in Intracerebral Haemorrhage (ISTICH), a multicenter, randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate the role of surgery after spontaneous supratentorial ICH. This trial is coordinated from our center in Newcastle-on-Tyne but involves 86 centers worldwide and at the time of writing had randomized 400 patients. We are encouraging new centers.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
This work was supported by the Medical Research Council, the Stroke Association, and the Royal College of Surgeons of England.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
1. Bamford J, Sandercock P, Dennis M, Burn J, Warlow C. A prospective study of acute cerebrovascular disease in the community: the Oxfordshire Community Stroke Project,1981–86, 2: incidence, case fatality rates and overall outcome at one year of cerebral infarction, primary intracerebral and subarachnoid haemorrhage. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1990;53:16–22.
2. Fernandes H, Mendelow A. Spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage: a surgical dilemma. Br J Neurosurg. 1999;13:389–394.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
3. Broderick J, Brott T, Tomsick T, Tew J, Duldner J, Huster G. Management of intracerebral hemorrhage in a large metropolitan population. Neurosurgery. 1994;34:882–887.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
4. Kaufman H, Schochet S. Intracerebral Hematomas. New York, NY: Raven Press; 1992:13–21.
5. Unwin DH, Batjer HH, Greenlee RG Jr. Management controversy: medical versus surgical therapy for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage Neurosurg Clin N Am. 1992;3:533–537.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
6.
Hankey GJ, Hon C. Surgery for primary
intracerebral hemorrhage: is it safe and
effective? A systematic review of case series and randomized trials.
Stroke. 1997;28:2126–2132.
7. McKissock W, Richardson A, Taylor J. Primary intracerebral haemorrhage: a controlled trial of surgical and conservative treatment in 180 unselected cases. Lancet.. 1961;2:221–226.
8. Chen X, Yang H, Czherig Z. A prospective randomised trial of surgical and conservative treatment of hypertensive intracranial haemorrhage [in Chinese]. Acta Acad Med Shanghai. 1992;19:237–240.
9. Juvela S, Heiskanen O, Poranen A, Valtonen S, Kuurne T, Kaste M, Troupp H. The treatment of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage: a prospective randomized trial of surgical and conservative treatment. J Neurosurg. 1989;70:755–758.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
10.
Batjer HH, Reisch JS, Allen BC, Plaizier LJ, Jen Su C.
Failure of surgery to improve outcome in hypertensive putaminal
hemorrhage: a prospective randomized trial. Arch
Neurol. 1990;47:1103–1106.
11. Auer LM, Deinsberger W, Neiderkorn K, Gell G, Kleinert R, Schneider G, Holzer P, Bone G, Mokry M, Korner E, Kleinert G, Hanusch S. Endoscopic surgery versus medical treatment for spontaneous intracerebral hematoma: a randomized study. J Neurosurg. 1989;70:530–535.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
12.
Morgenstern LB, Frankowski RF, Shedden P, Pasteur W,
Grotta JC. Surgical treatment for intracerebral
hemorrhage (STICH): a single-center, randomized clinical
trial. Neurology. 1998;51:1359–1363.
13.
Zuccarello M, Brott T, Derex L, Kothari R, Sauerbeck L,
Tew J, Van Loveren H, Yeh HS, Tomsick T, Pancioli A, Khoury J,
Broderick J. Early surgical treatment for
supratentorial intracerebral
hemorrhage: a randomized feasibility study. Stroke. 1999;30:1833–1839.
14. Prasad K, Shrivastava A. Surgery for primary supratentorial intracerebral haemorrhage (Cochrane review). In: The Cochrane Library, issue 4, 2000. Oxford, UK: Update Software.
15. Prasad K, Bowman G, Srivastava A, Menon G. Surgery in primary supratentorial intracerebral hematoma: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Acta Neurol Scand. 1997;95:103–110.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
16. Saver J. Surgical therapy. In: Feldmann E, ed. Intracerebral Hemorrhage.Armonk, NY: Futura Publishing Co;1994:303–332.
17.
Cook D, Mulrow C, Haynes R. Systematic reviews:
synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern
Med. 1997;126:376–380.
18. Armitage P, Berry G. Statistical Methods In Medical Research. Oxford, UK: Blackwell; 1987.
19.
Saver JL, Hankey G, Hon C. Surgery for primary
intracerebral hemorrhage: meta-analysis
of CT-era studies. Stroke. 1998;29:1477–1478. Letter and
response.
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  S. A. Mayer, S. M. Davis, B. E. Skolnick, N. C. Brun, K. Begtrup, J. P. Broderick, M. N. Diringer, and T. Steiner Can a Subset of Intracerebral Hemorrhage Patients Benefit From Hemostatic Therapy With Recombinant Activated Factor VII? Stroke, March 1, 2009; 40(3): 833 - 840. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Broderick, S. Connolly, E. Feldmann, D. Hanley, C. Kase, D. Krieger, M. Mayberg, L. Morgenstern, C. S. Ogilvy, P. Vespa, et al. REPRINT: Guidelines for the Management of Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage in Adults: 2007 Update: A Guideline From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Stroke Council, High Blood Pressure Research Council, and the Quality of Care and Outcomes in Research Interdisciplinary Working Group: The American Academy of Neurology affirms the value of this guideline as an educational tool for neurologists. Circulation, October 16, 2007; 116(16): e391 - e413. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Broderick, S. Connolly, E. Feldmann, D. Hanley, C. Kase, D. Krieger, M. Mayberg, L. Morgenstern, C. S. Ogilvy, P. Vespa, et al. Guidelines for the Management of Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage in Adults: 2007 Update: A Guideline From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Stroke Council, High Blood Pressure Research Council, and the Quality of Care and Outcomes in Research Interdisciplinary Working Group: The American Academy of Neurology affirms the value of this guideline as an educational tool for neurologists. Stroke, June 1, 2007; 38(6): 2001 - 2023. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. A. Rabinstein and E. F. M. Wijdicks Determinants of Outcome in Anticoagulation-Associated Cerebral Hematoma Requiring Emergency Evacuation Arch Neurol, February 1, 2007; 64(2): 203 - 206. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. S. Kase Hemostatic Treatment in the Early Stage of Intracerebral Hemorrhage: The Recombinant Factor VIIa Experience Stroke, October 1, 2005; 36(10): 2321 - 2322. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. C. Haley Jr, J. L.P. Thompson, B. Levin, S. Davis, K. R. Lees, J. G. Pittman, J. T. DeRosa, P. Ordronneau, D. L. Brown, R. L. Sacco, et al. Gavestinel Does Not Improve Outcome After Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage: An Analysis From the GAIN International and GAIN Americas Studies Stroke, May 1, 2005; 36(5): 1006 - 1010. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. M. Manno, J. L. D. Atkinson, J. R. Fulgham, and E. F. M. Wijdicks Emerging Medical and Surgical Management Strategies in the Evaluation and Treatment of Intracerebral Hemorrhage Mayo Clin. Proc., March 1, 2005; 80(3): 420 - 433. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. A. Gregson and A. D. Mendelow International Variations in Surgical Practice for Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage Stroke, November 1, 2003; 34(11): 2593 - 2597. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. D. Schellinger, J. B. Fiebach, K. Hoffmann, K. Becker, B. Orakcioglu, R. Kollmar, E. Juttler, P. Schramm, S. Schwab, K. Sartor, et al. Stroke MRI in Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Is There a Perihemorrhagic Penumbra? Stroke, July 1, 2003; 34(7): 1674 - 1679. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. J. Hankey Evacuation of Intracerebral Hematoma Is Likely to Be Beneficial--Against Stroke, June 1, 2003; 34(6): 1568 - 1569. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Minematsu Evacuation of Intracerebral Hematoma Is Likely to Be Beneficial Stroke, June 1, 2003; 34(6): 1567 - 1568. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. A. Mayer Ultra-Early Hemostatic Therapy for Intracerebral Hemorrhage Stroke, January 1, 2003; 34(1): 224 - 229. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. A. Rabinstein, J. L. Atkinson, and E. F.M. Wijdicks Emergency craniotomy in patients worsening due to expanded cerebral hematoma: To what purpose? Neurology, May 14, 2002; 58(9): 1367 - 1372. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Castillo, A. Davalos, J. Alvarez-Sabin, J. M. Pumar, R. Leira, Y. Silva, J. Montaner, and C.S. Kase Molecular signatures of brain injury after intracerebral hemorrhage Neurology, February 26, 2002; 58(4): 624 - 629. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||