Prognosis of Cerebral Vein and Dural Sinus Thrombosis
Results of the International Study on Cerebral Vein and Dural Sinus Thrombosis (ISCVT)
Background and Purpose— The natural history and long-term prognosis of cerebral vein and dural sinus thrombosis (CVT) have not been examined previously by adequately powered prospective studies.
Methods— We performed a multinational (21 countries), multicenter (89 centers), prospective observational study. Patients were followed up at 6 months and yearly thereafter. Primary outcome was death or dependence as assessed by modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score >2 at the end of follow-up.
Results— From May 1998 to May 2001, 624 adult patients with CVT were registered. At the end of follow-up (median 16 months), 356 patients (57.1%) had no symptom or signs (mRS=0), 137 (22%) had minor residual symptoms (mRS=1), and 47 (7.5%) had mild impairments (mRS=2). Eighteen (2.9%) were moderately impaired (mRS=3), 14 (2.2%) were severely handicapped (mRS=4 or 5), and 52 (8.3%) had died. Multivariate predictors of death or dependence were age >37 years (hazard ratio [HR]=2.0), male sex (HR=1.6), coma (HR=2.7), mental status disorder (HR=2.0), hemorrhage on admission CT scan (HR=1.9), thrombosis of the deep cerebral venous system (HR=2.9), central nervous system infection (HR=3.3), and cancer (HR=2.9). Fourteen patients (2.2%) had a recurrent sinus thrombosis, 27 (4.3%) had other thrombotic events, and 66 (10.6%) had seizures.
Conclusions— The prognosis of CVT is better than reported previously. A subgroup (13%) of clinically identifiable CVT patients is at increased risk of bad outcome. These high-risk patients may benefit from more aggressive therapeutic interventions, to be studied in randomized clinical trials.
Cerebral vein and sinus thrombosis (CVT) is rare compared with arterial stroke, and it often occurs in young people. Its clinical evolution seems to be different from other stroke subtypes and is highly variable between studies.1 Reliable data on natural history and prognosis of CVT are scarce and are based mainly on single-center or single-country studies of modest size.2–7 Treatment of sinus thrombosis with heparin is safe and is likely to improve its outcome.8–10 Local endovascular thrombolysis may improve outcome in selected cases but has only been tried in small uncontrolled case series.11 Despite improvements in diagnosis and treatment, dural sinus thrombosis may still cause death or permanent disability.2–10
The International Study on Cerebral Vein and Dural Sinus Thrombosis (ISCVT) was initiated to obtain reliable evidence on clinical presentation, risk factors, outcome, and prognostic factors in a large prospective, multicenter series of patients with CVT.
Subjects and Methods
Organization of Study, Cases, and Case Ascertainment
ISCVT is a prospective multinational observational study that included consecutive patients (aged >15 years) with symptomatic CVT. All participants committed themselves to provide data on consecutive cases diagnosed at their institutions and to perform at least a 6-month follow-up observation. Case report forms with inclusion and follow-up data were sent to the coordinating center in Lisbon, Portugal. All data were cross-checked and validated at the end of the follow-up period. Inclusion started in May 1998 and continued until May 2001. Patients were followed up from diagnosis to December 31, 2002.
Most of the participants were neurologists. In order not to miss cases admitted to other departments, investigators were asked to disseminate information about the study in their hospitals and to search for cases in the emergency, imaging, intensive care, and other hospital departments.
Imaging, Demographic and Clinical Data, Risk Factors, and Treatment
The diagnosis of CVT had to be confirmed by conventional angiography, CT venography, MRI combined with MR venography, surgery, or autopsy, following established diagnostic criteria.1 Central review of the imaging results was optional.
We recorded the following information: demographic data; dates of onset of symptoms, of hospital admission, and of confirmation of the diagnosis by imaging (considered as day 0); symptoms and signs from onset to diagnosis; Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score on admission and during the clinical course; imaging methods used; location of the thrombus; and number, location, and size of any parenchymal lesions.
Presenting syndromes were dichotomized as isolated intracranial hypertension (any combination of headache, vomiting, and papilledema with/without visual loss or sixth nerve paresis, without other neurological symptoms or signs) and other presenting syndromes.
A list of potential risk factors for CVT was attached to the inclusion form to assist investigators with the etiological workup (available at www.iscvt.com). Lumbar puncture (unless contraindicated) and thrombophilia screening (proteins C and S, antithrombin III, lupus anticoagulant, anticardiolipin antibodies, factor V Leiden, and G20210A mutations) were recommended.
The choice of treatment was left to the treating physician, but all treatments were systematically recorded.
Follow-up visits were performed at 6 months, at 12 months, and yearly thereafter, preferably by direct interview and observation by the local investigators. If that was not possible, alternative methods included telephone interview of the patient or interview of a relative or general practitioner. For patients who were lost to follow-up, the condition on the day of hospital discharge was regarded as the final follow-up. Follow-up data recorded were as follows: disability (according to modified Rankin Scale [mRS]),12 death, recurrent symptomatic sinus thrombosis (new symptoms with new thrombus on repeated venogram or MRI), other thrombotic events, seizures, headaches requiring bed rest or hospital admission, severe visual loss (quantified with an optometric chart as <4/10), pregnancy, abortion, and current antithrombotic and other treatments.
Outcome was classified according to the mRS as complete recovery (mRS 0 to 1); partial recovery, independent (mRS 2); dependent (mRS 3 to 5); and death (mRS 6). For patients who had a telephone follow-up, the mRS score was assessed by 3 previously validated questions.13
Primary outcome was death or dependence (mRS >2) at the end of the follow-up period. Secondary outcomes were death and death or dependence at 6 months. For patients who missed the 6-month evaluation but had the 1-year follow-up, we adopted the “worst Rankin” scenario: we used the mRS score either at discharge or at 1-year follow-up (whichever was worse) to estimate disability at 6 months.
We considered demographic, clinical, and imaging variables and risk factors as possible explanatory variables of the outcomes (see Appendix 2, which is available online at http://stroke.ahajournals.org). Bivariate analysis was performed for each outcome with the χ2 test (with Yates correction when necessary) or Fisher exact test for categorical data and with the Student t test or ANOVA for continuous data. Variables associated (P<0.10) with outcomes in the bivariate analysis were entered into a multivariate analysis.
For the outcome “death or dependence at the end of follow-up, ” we performed survival analysis using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression statistics. We calculated the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for the retained variables. For the remaining secondary outcomes, we performed a logistic regression analysis (backward method) and calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for the retained variables. Data were analyzed with SPSS 11.0 for Windows.
Six hundred twenty-four adult cases were included in the study from 89 centers in 21 countries. The median delay from onset of symptoms to admission was 4 days (mean=14.5; SD=57.4 days) and from onset of symptoms to diagnosis 7 days (mean=18.3; SD=59.4 days). The diagnosis of CVT was established by MRI/MR venography in 443 patients (71%), by intra-arterial angiography in 74 (12%), by CT venography in 13 (2%), by multiple imaging methods in 89 (14%), and by surgery or autopsy in 5 (1%). The mode of onset was acute in 232 patients (37.2%), subacute in 346 (55.5%), and chronic in 45 (7.2%). One hundred forty-three patients (22.9%) presented with isolated intracranial hypertension. Eighty-three (13.9%) had a GCS score of between 9 and 13, and 31 (5.2%) were comatose (GCS <9). Demographic, clinical, and imaging features are shown in Table 1. Lumbar puncture was performed in 224 patients: opening pressure was >180 mm H2O in 106 (83.5%), 71 had >5 cells (47.1%), and 96 (34.3%) had >45 mg/dL protein.
Investigation of thrombophilia was performed systematically in 75% of the centers. Risk factors are summarized in Table 2. Thrombophilia, either genetic or acquired, and oral contraceptives were the most common risk factors. Many patients (272 [43.6%]) had >1 known risk factor.
In the acute phase, most patients (520 [83.3%]) were anticoagulated with intravenous heparin (401 cases [64%]) or subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) (218 patients [34.9%]) in therapeutic dosages. A few patients received only subcutaneous LMWH in prophylactic dosage (9 patients [1.4%]) or antiplatelet drugs (37 patients [5.9%]). Thirteen patients (2.1%) were treated with local endovascular thrombolysis. Additional treatments included antiepileptic drugs (277 patients [44.4%]), osmotherapy (82 [13.2%]), steroids (150 [24.1%]), acetazolamide (61 [9.8%]), and diuretics (34 [5.5%]). Shunts were performed in 10 patients (1.6%), 9 (1.4%) had decompressive craniotomy or hematoma evacuation, and 7 (1.1%) required mechanical ventilation.
Information on outcome at discharge was available for all patients (Table 3). Median hospital stay was 17 days (mean=20.4, SD=14.3). Thirty-day case fatality was 3.4% (21 cases).
Six-month follow-up was assessed by face-to-face interview in 432 patients (77%), by telephone interview in 91 (16.3%), by other means in 27 (4.8%), and not specified in 10 (1.8%). Thirty-seven patients (6%) missed the 6-month evaluation but had subsequent follow-ups. At 6 months, 437 patients (79.6%) were on oral anticoagulation.
At the end of the study we had follow-up information for 98.7% of the patients. Eight patients (1.3%) were lost to follow-up after discharge. The last follow-up was performed by face-to-face interview in 358 patients (61%), by telephone in 189 (32%), by other means in 29 (4.9%), and not specified in 13 (2%). Median length of follow-up was 16 months (mean=18.6, SD=11.1). Median time on oral anticoagulants after discharge was 231 days (7.7 months). Eleven of the 25 deaths (44%) that occurred after the acute phase were not caused by sinus thrombosis but by an underlying condition. There were no significant differences in outcome between patients enrolled in different countries or world regions. Patients presenting with isolated intracranial hypertension syndrome had a better outcome (10 dead/dependent [7%]) than the remaining patients (75 dead/dependent [13.6%]; HR=0.45; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.87). We found a nonsignificant difference in outcome in favor of the patients who were anticoagulated in therapeutic doses in the acute phase (66/520 [12.7%] dead/dependent versus 19/104 [18.3%]; HR=0.73; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.21). Results of the Cox regression analysis at last follow-up are shown in Table 4.
Results of logistic regression analysis for secondary outcomes are shown in Table I, which is available online at http://stroke.ahajournals.org.
Events occurring during follow-up are shown in Table 5. Thirty-four women became pregnant after CVT. There were 9 abortions (4 spontaneous, 5 voluntary) and 21 (61.7%) uneventful pregnancies. Complications in the remaining 4 pregnancies included recurrent CVT (1 patient) and limb or pelvic venous thrombosis (2 patients) and seizures (1 patient). Only 1 woman who suffered recurrent thrombotic events was on LMWH. Among the 77 women who had CVT related to pregnancy or puerperium, 8 had uncomplicated new pregnancies, 1 pregnant woman experienced a seizure, and there were 1 spontaneous and 2 voluntary abortions.
The main objectives of this prospective multicenter international study were achieved. This is the largest cohort ever published (624 CVT patients) collected over a short period of time, with the largest follow-up (median 16 months). The prognosis was better than reported previously. Nevertheless, 8% died, either as a direct consequence of CVT or due to an underlying condition. Risk factors for an unfavorable outcome were identified and included male sex, age >37 years, coma, mental status disorder, intracranial hemorrhage on admission, thrombosis of the deep cerebral venous system, central nervous system (CNS) infection, and cancer.
Strengths of the study include the collaboration between many types of hospitals in different countries and continents, which diminishes potential inclusion bias. CVT was confirmed in all cases with current technology and established consensus criteria. Completeness of follow-up was satisfactory, with only 1.3% lost after discharge. Methodological limitations of the study include lack of central review of imaging and absence of uniform etiological workup or treatment. Nevertheless, an extensive search for risk factors was pursued in the majority of the patients, as supported by the small number (12.5%) of patients without identified risk factors. Notably, a systematic search for thrombophilia was performed in 75% of the centers. More than 80% of the patients were anticoagulated with therapeutic doses of heparin.
Incomplete case ascertainment is a possible source of bias. Since the majority of the participants are neurologists, we may have missed severe cases admitted to intensive care units and therefore underestimated death and disability. To decrease this potential bias, investigators were asked repeatedly to search for cases through imaging and other hospital departments and intensive care units.
Because the ISCVT has a pragmatic design and included patients from 89 centers in 21 countries, results of this study are generalizable to CVT patients around the world with the exception of Africa or Asia because very few patients from these continents were included. A higher frequency of CVT related to infections, anemia, and pregnancy/puerperium14,15 and a less favorable outcome for CVT patients in these continents are possibilities that need to be verified. ISCVT results do not apply to children, who may have a worse prognosis than adults.16
Before ISCVT, only 6 prospective studies examined the long-term outcome after CVT.2–7 These studies were based on a single center or single country and had modest sample sizes. These features limit their statistical power and generalizability. Results from these series concerning death and disability were contradictory (Table 6), perhaps related to referral bias. Total death rate at the end of follow-up in the aforementioned studies ranged from 0%7 to 39%.2 The death/dependence rate at the end of follow-up varied from 9%5 to 44%, 2 while in ISCVT only 13% of the patients either had died or were dependent at the end of follow-up.
Deaths during follow-up were as frequent as acute deaths but were predominantly related to underlying diseases, such as malignancies. Very few patients remained dependent. This finding contrasts with the outcome from arterial stroke types, in which the proportion of permanently dependent patients ranges between one third and two thirds of the survivors.17
Long-term prognostic factors were analyzed by multivariate methods in 3 previous studies.4–6 ISCVT confirmed coma,4 cerebral hemorrhage,4 and malignancy6 as important prognostic factors for death or dependence. In addition, we identified male sex, age >37 years, mental status disorder, thrombosis of the deep cerebral venous system, and CNS infection as variables that increase the risk of death or dependence. Seizures (10%) and new thrombotic events (4%) were the most frequent complications during follow-up. Recurrence of CVT and severe visual loss were exceptional but severe and potentially preventable occurrences. Except for spontaneous abortions, other complications rarely occurred during or after new pregnancies. These findings strongly support the evidence that past CVT (including puerperal CVT) is not a contraindication to pregnancy.18,19
Our results have implications for clinical practice concerning the investigation, treatment, and prognosis of patients with CVT. We found that patients with CVT usually have multiple risk factors. Therefore, the identification of 1 risk factor (eg, contraceptives, infection) should not stop the search for additional risk factors, in particular inherited or acquired thrombophilia. More than 80% of the patients were treated with anticoagulants, indicating a consensus among most participants on the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation in the acute phase of CVT.10 The ISCVT has identified easily available variables that predict an unfavorable outcome. Patients with these characteristics deserve additional close monitoring, and some may be candidates for more aggressive interventions, such as local thrombolysis and reduction of intracranial pressure.
The results of our study also have implications for research. Future randomized clinical trials of aggressive and potentially hazardous interventions such as local thrombolysis11 or decompressive craniectomy20 should be targeted at high-risk patients. Because of the comparative rarity of CVT, such studies can only succeed through international collaborative efforts such as that initiated in the ISCVT.
J.M. Ferro, J. Stam, M-G. Bousser, F. Barinagarrementeria, K. Einhäupl.
J.M. Ferro, P. Canhão, Marisa Costa.
The following centers and investigators participated in the ISCVT. The number of patients included at each center is given in parentheses. Hôpital Lariboisière Paris, France (49, M-G. Bousser and I. Crassard); Instituto Nacional de Neurologia y Neurocirurgia, Mexico City, Mexico (42, F. Barrinagarrementeria and C. Cantú); Hospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil (30, A. Massaro and E. Camargo); Hospital de Santa Maria Lisbon, Portugal (28, J.M. Ferro, P. Canhão, T.P. Melo); Centre Hospitalier Régional et Universitaire de Lille, France (27, D. Leys, M.A. Mackowiak-Cordoliani, and O. Godefroy); Centre Hospitalier Universitaire-Hôpital Central Nancy, France (22, X. Ducrocq and J-C. Lacour); Hospital São Marcos Braga, Portugal (17, J. Fontes, J. Figueiredo, E. Lourenço, and R. Maré); Hospital Egas Moniz Lisbon, Portugal (16, M.V. Baptista and I. Palma); Hospitais da Universidade de Coimbra, Portugal (15, M.A. Ferro, M.C. Macário, and B. Rodrigues); Universität Heidelberg, Germany (15, W. Hacke and C. Berger); University of Giessen, Germany (14, E. Stolz and T. Gerriets); Academic Medical Centre Amsterdam, Netherlands (13, J. Stam); CHU-Dijon, France (11, M. Giroud and S-E. Megherbi); Parma University, Italy (12, U. Scoditti and C. Bertolino); University Hospital of Lund, Sweden (11, A. Lindgren); Escola Paulista de Medicina São Paulo, Brazil (10, M.M. Fukujima); Hospital Geral de Santo António Porto, Portugal (10, G. Lopes, M. Correia, A.M. Silva, and C. Correia); Neurologische Klinik Charité Berlin, Germany (10, K. Einhäupl, J.M. Valdueza, and M. Weih); Institut Català de la Salut-Ciutat Sanitària i Universitària de Bellvitge Barcelona, Spain (10, F. Rubio and M. Jato); Hospital Civil de Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico (10, J.L. Ruiz Sandoval and A. Gutierrez); Hospital Garcia da Horta, Almada, Portugal (9, F. Pita); Hôpital D’Adultes de la Timone Marseille, France (9, L. Milandre); IRCCS Maggiore Hospital Milano, Italy (9, I. Martinelli and F. Lussana); University Hospital Gasthuisberg Leuven, Belgium (8, R. Vandenberghe); Ospedale Niguarda Ca’Granda Milano, Italy (8, R. Sterzi and A. Ciccone); Instituto de Neurocirurgia Santiago, Chile (8, P. Lavados); University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, US (8, S.E. Kasner, B. Cucchiara, and D.S. Liebeskind); University of Regensburg, Germany (7, U. Bogdahn and F. Schlachetzki); Neurologische Universitäts Klinik Würzburg, Germany (7, F. Weilbach); Southern General Hospital Scotland/Glasgow, UK (7, K. Muir and I. Bone); Azienda Ospedaliera S. Giovanni Battista Torino, Italy (7, R. Rudà and G. Gallo); Hospital Universitario G Marañón, Madrid, Spain (6, J.A. Villanueva Osorio); Hospital Universitario La Paz Madrid, Spain (6, E. Díez-Tejedor and B. Fuentes); Princess Alexandra Hospital Brisbane, Australia (6, R.S. Boyle); O.Ö. Landes-Nervenklinic Linz, Austria (6, F. Aichner and A. Brucker); Westeinde Ziekenhuis The Hague, Netherlands (6, H.P. Bienfait, F. Bouwman, and J. Tans); CHU Montpellier-Nimes, France (6, P. Labauge); Hospital Fernando Fonseca, Amadora, Portugal (6, A.N. Pinto, C. Costa, A.V. Salgado, and A. Leal); Hospital São João, Porto, Portugal, (5, C. Pontes and M.J. Rosas); Centro Hospitalar de Coimbra, Portugal (5, M. Grilo and P. Mateus); Hospital São Pedro, Vila Real, Portugal (5, M.R. Silva, G. Neves, R. Chorão, I. Matos); Hôpital E. Muller Mulhouse, France (5, G. Rodier); Hospital Virgen Blanca Léon, Spain (5, J. Tejada Garcia and A. Ares); A.Z. Sint-Jan A.V. Brugge, Belgium (5, V. Schotte and G. Vanhooren); Università degli Studi di Brescia Spedali Civili, Italy (5, A. Pezzini and M. Magoni); Ospedale Riuniti Bergamo, Italy (5, B. Censori, L. Casto, and A. Mamoli); Academisch Ziekenhuis Utrecht, Netherlands (4, L.J. Kappelle and J. Van Gijn); Atrium MC Heerlen, Netherlands (3, C.L. Franke); Hôpital Nord-CHU D’Amiens, France (3, O. Godefroy); Faculdade de Medicina da Santa Casa de São Paulo, Brazil (3, R. Gagliardi, K. Helner, and A. Lebre); Hospital Sagrat Cor of Barcelona, Spain (3, A. Arboix Damunt); Hospital Clinic I Provincial de Barcelona, Spain (3, A. Chamorro and N. Vila); University College of London, UK (3, M. Brown); Mont-Godinne University Hospital Yvoir, Belgium (3, P. Laloux); Cliniques Universitaires St Luc Bruxelles, Belgium (3, A. Peeters); University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy (3, C. Stucchi and M. Cavazzuti); CHUM Hôpital Notre Dame, Montréal, Québec, Canada (3, L.H. Lebrun and S. Lanthier); Xuanwu Hospital-CUMS Beijing, China (3, J. Jia and W. Zhou); The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (2, S. Lanthier, G. deVeber, and T. Domi); Hospital Espírito Santo, Évora, Portugal (2, I. Henriques, L. Guerra, and L. Rebocho); Hospital Distrital do Barreiro, Portugal (2, Z. Goulard and T. Cortez); Hospital Distrital de Faro, Portugal (2, F. Ferreira and L. Afonso); Ziekenhuis Leyenburg The Hague, Netherlands (2, S.F.T.M. de Bruijn); Hospital Universitario Clementino Fraga Filho Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (2, C. André); Hospital de Santa Catarina São Paulo, Brazil (2, R. Menoncello); Hospital General Vall D’Hebron, Spain (2, J. Alvarez Sabin and A. Ortega); Hospital Universitari Germans Trias I Pujol Badalona, Spain (2, D. Escudero Rubi and M. Milan); Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg (2, R. Metz); University Hospital Antwerp Edegem, Belgium (2, P. Cras); University “La Sapienza” Rome, Italy (2, C. Fieschi and D. Toni); Ospedale San Paolo Alla Barona Milano, Italy (2, C. Motto); Royal Perth Hospital, Australia (2, G. Hankey and C. Phatouros); New Jersey Neuroscience Institute, US (2, S. Sen); Hospital São Teotónio Viseu, Portugal (1, J.L. Loureiro); University Hospital of Ghent, Belgium (1, J. de Reuck, J. DeBleeker); Hospital SAMS Lisbon, Portugal (1, M. Crespo); Hospital Pedro Hispano-Senhora da Hora, Portugal (1, J. Pinheiro); Hospital CUF, Lisbon, Portugal (1, C. Beirão); Centre Hospitalier St Joseph-Esperance Liege, Belgium (1, P. Desfontaines and L. Hansen); St Elisabeth Ziekenhuis-Tilburg Hospital, Netherlands (1, C.C. Tijssen); Azienda Ospedaliera Careggi Firenze, Italy (1, P. Nencini); Medisch Centrum Alkmaar, Netherlands (1, M.G. Charbon); Hospital Angeles de Querétaro, Mexico (1, F. Barrinagarrementeria); Faculdade de Medicina da PUCRS, Porto Alegre, Brazil (1, J.G. Fernandes); Complejo Hospitalario de Cáceres, Spain (1, L. Casado); Hospital de la Sta Creu I Santa Pau, Barcelona, Spain (1, J. Martí-Fabregas, A. Lleó, and J. Marti-Vilalta); Hospital de Clínicas-Tacuarembo, Uruguay (1, M. de Matos); Bombay Hospital, Mumbai, Índia (1, N. Bharucha and L. Kuruvilla); Clínica Anglo Americana San Isidro-Lima, Perú (1, J. Altamirano and F. Solís).
Variables Tested in Bivariate Analysis for Different Outcomes
Variables tested in bivariate analysis for different outcomes are as follows: Demographic: age (dichotomized for median of the sample), sex, ethnicity (white, black, Hispanic, Asian, other). Days to admission, days to diagnosis or referral.Clinical: clinical course (acute if interval from onset of symptoms to diagnosis was <48 hours; subacute, between 48 hours and 30 days; chronic, >30 days); symptoms and signs since onset until admission (headache, visual loss, papilledema, diplopia, coma, aphasia, mental status disorder, right paresis, left paresis, any paresis, bilateral motor signs, focal seizure, seizure with generalization, any seizure, sensory symptoms); GCS score divided into 3 categories: 15 to 14, 13 to 9, <9 (comatose); presentation syndrome. Lesions on admission CT/MRI: infarct or edema (left or right hemisphere, posterior fossa), hemorrhage (left or right, posterior); any parenchymal lesion (infarct or hemorrhage); bilateral lesions (infarct or hemorrhage), posterior fossa lesion (infarct or hemorrhage); number of lesions >1 cm and number of lesions >5 cm. Location of thrombosis: superior sagittal sinus, right lateral sinus, left lateral sinus, straight sinus, deep cerebral venous system, cortical vein, jugular vein, >1 sinus. Risk factors: genetic or acquired thrombophilia; malignancy (CNS malignancy, solid tumor outside CNS, hematological malignancy, any malignancy); CNS disorders (dural fistulae, venous anomaly, arteriovenous malformation); hematological condition (anemia, polycythemia, thrombocythemia); vasculitis; other inflammatory systemic disorders; other systemic disorders; infection (CNS infection, ear/nose/throat, other, all infections), puerperium (pregnancy, postpartum), drugs (oral contraceptives, others), mechanical precipitants (lumbar puncture, cranial trauma, jugular catheter occlusion, neurosurgery), number of risk factors, any risk factor).⇓
This study was supported by PRAXIS grant C/SAU/10248/1998 from the Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia.
A complete list of the International Study on Cerebral Vein and Dural Sinus Thrombosis Investigators appears in Appendix 1.
- Received August 7, 2003.
- Revision received October 21, 2003.
- Accepted December 2, 2003.
Bousser MG, Russell RR. Cerebral venous thrombosis. In: Warlow CP, Van Gijn J, eds. Major Problems in Neurology. London, UK: WB Saunders; 1997: 27–29.
Preter M, Tzourio CH, Ameri A, Bousser MG. Long term prognosis in cerebral venous thrombosis: a follow-up of 77 patients. Stroke. 1996; 27: 243–246.
de Bruijn SFTM, de Haan RJ, Stam J, for the Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis Study Group. Clinical features and prognostic factors of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis in a prospective series of 59 patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2001; 70: 105–108.
Cakmak S, Derex L, Berruyer M, Nighoghossian N, Philippeau F, Adeleine P, Hermier M, Froment JC, Trouillas P. Cerebral venous thrombosis: clinical outcome and systematic screening of prothrombotic factors. Neurology. 2003; 60: 1175–1178.
de Bruijn SFTM, Stam J, for the Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis Study Group. Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of anticoagulant treatment with low-molecular-weight heparin for cerebral sinus thrombosis. Stroke. 1999; 30: 484–488.
Stam J, de Bruijn SFTM, DeVeber G. Anticoagulation for cerebral sinus thrombosis (Cochrane review). In: The Cochrane Library, issue 1, 2003. Oxford, UK: Update Software.Stroke. 2003; 34: 1054–1055.
Sacco RL. Prognosis of stroke. In: Ginsberg MD, Bogousslavsky J, eds. Cerebrovascular Disease: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Management. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Science; 1998; 2: 879–891.
Lamy C, Hamon JB, Costa J, Mas JL, for the French Study Group on Stroke in Pregnancy. Ischemic stroke in young women: risk of recurrence during subsequent pregnancies. Neurology. 2000; 55: 269–274.
Lanska DJ, Kryscio RJ. Risk factors for peripartum and postpartum stroke and intracranial venous thrombosis. Stroke. 2000; 31: 1274–1282.