Vertebral artery hypoplasia is not currently considered an independent risk factor for stroke. Emerging evidence suggest that vertebral artery hypoplasia may contribute to posterior circulation ischemic events, especially when other risk factors coexist. In the present literature review, we present published data to discuss the relationship between a hypoplastic vertebral artery and posterior circulation cerebral ischemia. Despite difficulties and controversies in the accurate definition and prevalence estimation of vertebral artery hypoplasia, ultrasound studies reveal that the reduced blood flow observed ipsilateral to the hypoplastic vertebral artery may result in local cerebral hypoperfusion and subsequent focal neurological symptomatology. That risk of cerebral ischemia is related to the severity of the hypoplasia, suggesting that the smaller of paired arteries are more vulnerable to occlusion. Existing cohort studies further support clinical observations that hypoplastic vertebral artery enhances synergistically the vascular risk for posterior circulation ischemic events and is closely associated with both atherosclerotic and prothrombotic processes.

Background and Purpose-Although experimental data suggest that statin therapy may improve neurological outcome after acute cerebral ischemia, the results from clinical studies are conflicting. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the relationship between statin therapy and outcome after ischemic stroke. Methods-The primary analysis investigated statin therapy at stroke onset (prestroke statin use) and good functional outcome (modified Rankin score 0 to 2) and death. Secondary analyses included the following: (1) acute poststroke statin therapy (≤72 hours after stroke), and (2) thrombolysis-treated patients. Results-The primary analysis included 113 148 subjects (27 studies). Among observational studies, statin treatment at stroke onset was associated with good functional outcome at 90 days (pooled odds ratio [OR], 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29-1.56; P<0.001), but not 1 year (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.9-1.4; P=0.31), and with reduced fatality at 90 days (pooled OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.62-0.82; P<0.001) and 1 year (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, P=0.01). In the single randomized controlled trial reporting 90-day functional outcome, statin treatment was associated with good outcome (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.0-2.24; P=0.05). No reduction in fatality was observed on meta-analysis of data from 3 randomized controlled trials (P=0.9). In studies restricted to of thrombolysis-treated patients, an association between statins and increased fatality at 90 days was observed (pooled OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.02-1.52; P=0.03, 3 studies, 4339 patients). However, this association was no longer present after adjusting for age and stroke severity in the largest study (adjusted OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.90-1.44; 4012 patients). Conclusion-In the largest meta-analysis to date, statin therapy at stroke onset was associated with improved outcome, a finding not observed in studies restricted to thrombolysis-treated patients. 5-12 Experimental and clinical data also provide some evidence that statins may have neuroprotective effects after acute cerebral ischemia. [7][8][9][10][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29] In animal models, treatment with statins either before, or early after, cerebral arterial occlusion has been associated with reduced infarct volume and improved neurological function. [5][6][7][8][9][10]13,14 Data are conflicting regarding the relationship between acute statin therapy and outcome after human ischemic stroke. Some authors have reported improved survival and functional outcome associated with statin treatment, but these findings have not been consistently replicated. [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][31][32][33][34][35][36] Interpretations can be difficult because of limited sample sizes in some reports and possible bias in statin allocation in other studies, particularly those in which statins were allocated in a nonrandomized fashion. Some authors have also reported worse outcomes in patients treated with the combination of acute statins and intravenous thro...

No abstract

Accumulating evidence points toward a very high prevalence of prolonged neurological symptoms among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors. To date, there are no solidified criteria for ‘long-COVID’ diagnosis. Nevertheless, ‘long-COVID’ is conceptualized as a multi-organ disorder with a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations that may be indicative of underlying pulmonary, cardiovascular, endocrine, hematologic, renal, gastrointestinal, dermatologic, immunological, psychiatric, or neurological disease. Involvement of the central or peripheral nervous system is noted in more than one-third of patients with antecedent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, while an approximately threefold higher incidence of neurological symptoms is recorded in observational studies including patient-reported data. The most frequent neurological manifestations of ‘long-COVID’ encompass fatigue; ‘brain fog’; headache; cognitive impairment; sleep, mood, smell, or taste disorders; myalgias; sensorimotor deficits; and dysautonomia. Although very limited evidence exists to date on the pathophysiological mechanisms implicated in the manifestation of ‘long-COVID’, neuroinflammatory and oxidative stress processes are thought to prevail in propagating neurological ‘long-COVID’ sequelae. In this narrative review, we sought to present a comprehensive overview of our current understanding of clinical features, risk factors, and pathophysiological processes of neurological ‘long-COVID’ sequelae. Moreover, we propose diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms that may aid in the prompt recognition and management of underlying causes of neurological symptoms that persist beyond the resolution of acute COVID-19. Furthermore, as causal treatments for ‘long-COVID’ are currently unavailable, we propose therapeutic approaches for symptom-oriented management of neurological ‘long-COVID’ symptoms. In addition, we emphasize that collaborative research initiatives are urgently needed to expedite the development of preventive and therapeutic strategies for neurological ‘long-COVID’ sequelae.

TCD is more sensitive but less specific compared to TTE for the detection of PFO in patients with cryptogenic cerebral ischemia. The overall diagnostic yield of TCD appears to outweigh that of TTE.

Current evidence from epidemiological, neuroimaging, pathological, pharmacotherapeutic, and clinical studies indicate an association of Alzheimer's disease with risk factors of vascular atherosclerotic disease either in isolation or in aggregate. “Metabolic syndrome” (MetS) is the name for a clustering of risk factors for cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes that are of metabolic origin. These include central obesity, elevated plasma glucose, high blood pressure, atherogenic dyslipidemia, a prothrombotic state, and a proinflammatory state. In this article, we provide an overview of the relevant literature with regard to the relationship of Alzheimer's disease with MetS. Accumulating evidence suggests a “vascular hypothesis” to be related to the pathology of Alzheimer's disease. In the light of this evidence, clinician may consider lifestyle interventions toward an early and effective cardiovascular risk-factor management to reduce the cardiometabolic and the cognitive decline risk, while further research of other preventive strategies may be warranted.

DOAC-related ICH is associated with smaller baseline hematoma volume and lesser neurologic deficit at hospital admission compared to VKA-related ICH.

The association between multiple sclerosis (MS) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been suggested, apart from their common epidemiological and immunological patterns, also due to observations of increased incidence of both IBD among MS patients and MS among IBD patients. We estimated the risk of concurrent IBD and MS comorbidity, using data from all available case-control studies. We calculated the corresponding Risk ratios (RRs) in each included case-control study to express the risk of IBD and MS concurrence at a given population. We performed additional subgroup analyses according to the type of registry from which the data of the cases were exported (IBD or MS registry) and the IBD type (Crohn's disease, CD or Ulcerative colitis, UC). We included 10 studies, comprising a total of 1,086,430 patients (0.08% of them with concurrent IBD and MS). Pooled RR for IBD/MS comorbitity was 1.54 (95% CI 1.40-1.67; p < 0.0001) with no differences (p = 0.91) among IBD and MS registries (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.36-1.72, p < 0.001 for MS comorbidity in IBD patients vs. RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.32-1.81, p < 0.001 for IBD comorbidity in MS patients). No difference was also found on the risk of MS comorbidity among patients with CD or UC (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.34-1.72, p < 0.001 vs. RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.38-1.74, p < 0.001; p for subgroup differences: 0.84). In all analyses no evidence of heterogeneity or publication bias was detected. Both IBD and MS patients seem to have a fifty-percent increased risk of MS or IBD comorbidity, respectively, with no apparent differences between patients with CD or UC.