Central nervous system infratentorial superficial siderosis (iSS) is increasingly detected by blood-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences. Despite this, there are no standardized diagnostic criteria, and the clinical-radiological spectrum, causes, and optimum investigation strategy are not established. We reviewed clinical and radiological details of patients with iSS assessed at a specialist neurological center during 2004-2016 using predefined standardized radiological criteria. All imaging findings were rated blinded to clinical details. We identified 65 patients with iSS, whom we classified into 2 groups: type 1 (classical) and type 2 (secondary) iSS. Type 1 (classical) iSS included 48 patients without any potentially causal radiologically confirmed single spontaneous or traumatic intracranial hemorrhage, of whom 39 (83%) had hearing loss, ataxia, or myelopathy; type 2 (secondary) iSS included 17 patients with a potentially causal radiologically confirmed spontaneous or traumatic intracranial hemorrhage, of whom none had hearing loss, ataxia, or myelopathy. Of the patients with type 1 (classical) iSS, 40 (83%) had a potentially causal cranial or spinal dural abnormality, 5 (11%) had an alternative cause, and 3 (6%) had no cause identified. Intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography did not identify any underlying causal lesions for type 1 iSS. Type 1 (classical) iSS, defined using simple radiological criteria, is associated with a characteristic neurological syndrome. Rational investigation, including spinal MRI, nearly always reveals a potential cause, most often a dural abnormality. Catheter angiography appears to be unhelpful, suggesting that classical iSS is not associated with macrovascular arterial pathology. Recognition of type 1 (classical) iSS should allow timely diagnosis and early consideration of treatment. Ann Neurol 2017;81:333-343.

All neurologists need to be able to recognise and treat cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). It is difficult to diagnose, partly due to its relative rarity, its multiple and various clinical manifestations (different from ‘conventional’ stroke, and often mimicking other acute neurological conditions), and because it is often challenging to obtain and interpret optimal and timely brain imaging. Although CVT can result in death or permanent disability, it generally has a favourable prognosis if diagnosed and treated early. Neurologists involved in stroke care therefore also need to be aware of the treatments for CVT (with varying degrees of supporting evidence): the mainstay is prompt anticoagulation but patients who deteriorate despite treatment can be considered for endovascular procedures (endovascular thrombolysis or thrombectomy) or neurosurgery (decompressive craniotomy). This review summarises current knowledge on the risk factors, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of CVT in adults, and highlights some areas for future research.

Rapid, safe and effective arterial recanalisation to restore blood flow and improve functional outcome remains the primary goal of hyperacute ischaemic stroke management. The benefit of intravenous thrombolysis with recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator for patients with severe stroke due to large artery occlusion is limited; early recanalisation is generally less than 30% for carotid, proximal middle cerebral artery or basilar artery occlusion. Since November 2014, nine positive randomised controlled trials of mechanical thrombectomy for large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation have led to a revolution in the care of patients with acute ischaemic stroke. Its efficacy is unmatched by any previous therapy in stroke medicine, with a number needed to treat of less than 3 for improved functional outcome. With effectiveness shown beyond any reasonable doubt, the key challenge now is how to implement accessible, safe and effective mechanical thrombectomy services. This review aims to provide neurologists and other stroke physicians with a summary of the evidence base, a discussion of practical aspects of delivering the treatment and future challenges. We aim to give guidance on some of the areas not clearly described in the clinical trials (based on evidence where available, but if not, on our own experience and practice) and highlight areas of uncertainty requiring further research.