Vasospasm secondary to responsive neurostimulator placement: a previously unreported complication. Illustrative case.

Brandon Rogowski, Aaron Miller, Brian F Saway, Jeffrey Wessell, Nathan C Rowland, Jonathan Ross Lena, William A Vandergrift
{"title":"Vasospasm secondary to responsive neurostimulator placement: a previously unreported complication. Illustrative case.","authors":"Brandon Rogowski,&nbsp;Aaron Miller,&nbsp;Brian F Saway,&nbsp;Jeffrey Wessell,&nbsp;Nathan C Rowland,&nbsp;Jonathan Ross Lena,&nbsp;William A Vandergrift","doi":"10.3171/CASE22435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Responsive Neurostimulation (RNS) system is an implantable device for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who are not candidates for resection of a seizure focus. As a relatively new therapeutic, the full spectrum of adverse effects has yet to be determined. A literature review revealed no previous reports of cerebral vasospasm following RNS implantation.</p><p><strong>Observations: </strong>A 35-year-old man developed severe angiographic and clinical vasospasm following bilateral mesial temporal lobe RNS implantation. He initially presented with concerns for status epilepticus 8 days after implantation. On hospital day 3, a decline in his clinical examination prompted imaging studies that revealed a left middle cerebral artery (MCA) stroke with angiographic evidence of severe vasospasm of the left internal carotid artery (ICA), MCA, anterior cerebral artery (ACA), and right ICA and ACA. Despite improvements in angiographic vasospasm after appropriate treatment, a thrombus developed in the posterior M2 branch, requiring mechanical thrombectomy. Ultimately, the patient was stabilized and discharged to a rehabilitation facility with residual cognitive and motor deficits.</p><p><strong>Lessons: </strong>Cerebral vasospasm as a cause of ischemic stroke after uneventful RNS implantation is exceedingly rare, yet demands particular attention given the potential for severe consequences and the growing number of patients receiving RNS devices.</p>","PeriodicalId":16554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neurosurgery: Case Lessons","volume":"5 22","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/73/c1/CASE22435.PMC10550669.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neurosurgery: Case Lessons","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/CASE22435","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Responsive Neurostimulation (RNS) system is an implantable device for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who are not candidates for resection of a seizure focus. As a relatively new therapeutic, the full spectrum of adverse effects has yet to be determined. A literature review revealed no previous reports of cerebral vasospasm following RNS implantation.

Observations: A 35-year-old man developed severe angiographic and clinical vasospasm following bilateral mesial temporal lobe RNS implantation. He initially presented with concerns for status epilepticus 8 days after implantation. On hospital day 3, a decline in his clinical examination prompted imaging studies that revealed a left middle cerebral artery (MCA) stroke with angiographic evidence of severe vasospasm of the left internal carotid artery (ICA), MCA, anterior cerebral artery (ACA), and right ICA and ACA. Despite improvements in angiographic vasospasm after appropriate treatment, a thrombus developed in the posterior M2 branch, requiring mechanical thrombectomy. Ultimately, the patient was stabilized and discharged to a rehabilitation facility with residual cognitive and motor deficits.

Lessons: Cerebral vasospasm as a cause of ischemic stroke after uneventful RNS implantation is exceedingly rare, yet demands particular attention given the potential for severe consequences and the growing number of patients receiving RNS devices.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

继发于反应性神经刺激器置入的血管痉挛:一种以前未报道的并发症。说明性案例。
背景:响应性神经刺激(RNS)系统是一种可植入设备,适用于不适合切除癫痫灶的耐药癫痫患者。作为一种相对较新的治疗方法,其不良反应的全谱尚待确定。文献综述显示,RNS植入后无脑血管痉挛的报告。观察:一名35岁男性在双侧近中颞叶RNS植入术后出现严重的血管造影和临床血管痉挛。植入后8天,他最初出现癫痫持续状态。住院第3天,他的临床检查下降,促使影像学研究显示左大脑中动脉(MCA)中风,血管造影证据显示左颈内动脉(ICA)、MCA、大脑前动脉(ACA)以及右颈内动脉和ACA严重血管痉挛。尽管经过适当治疗后血管造影血管痉挛有所改善,但M2后支出现血栓,需要进行机械血栓切除术。最终,患者病情稳定,并因残余的认知和运动缺陷出院到康复机构。经验教训:在顺利植入RNS后,作为缺血性中风原因的脑血管痉挛极为罕见,但考虑到潜在的严重后果和越来越多的患者接受RNS装置,需要特别关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信