Headache secondary to nontraumatic brain hemorrhage: a single-center, retrospective clinical study

Ljubisavljević, Srdjan; Ignjatović, Aleksandra; Ljubisavljevic, Marina

doi:10.5114/aoms.2019.90356

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cerebral venous thrombosis I: 1.32 to 1.75 per 100,000 persons per year [39,40] 76% to 77% [41,42] Cervical vertebral artery dissection I: 0.97 per 100,000 persons per year [43] 69% [44] Chiari malformation type I P: 96 per 100,000 persons [45] 43% to 81% [46][47][48][49] Giant cell arteritis P: 51.74 per 100,000 persons over 50 years [50] 86% to 87% [51,52] Hypothyroidism I: 226.2 per 100,000 persons per year [53] 30% to 34% [54,55] Idiopathic intracranial hypertension I: 0.9 per 100,000 persons per year [56,57] 32% [78] Non-traumatic intracranial haemorrhage I: 29.9 per 100,000 persons per year [79] 26% [80] Pituitary apoplexy I: 4.0 per 100,000 persons per year [37] 82% to 100% [81][82][83]…”

Section: Diagnosis Epidemiology Proportion With Headachementioning

confidence: 99%

Approaching Headaches—A Guide to Differential-Diagnostic Considerations and Causal Claims

Pohl

2023

CTN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Headaches can be nociplastic, neuropathic, and nociceptive. Pain related to the latter two categories occurs in the presence of nerve lesions and nociceptive stimuli; attributing pain to the last category requires a list of potential causes and arguments supporting the causal claim. Taking a history and examining patients serves to assess diagnostic criteria and screen for disorders whose diagnosis requires additional examinations. Screening information occurs in two types: one indicates that patients have a headache due to another condition; the other suggests they are at risk. Aspiring to make causal claims for a headache is reasonable because if underlying disorders appear independently and randomly, it is probable that there is only one cause. Thus, having found a cause often implies having found the cause. The prerequisites for causal claims are temporal sequencing, correlation, and elimination of alternate causes. Mechanistic, manipulative, and probabilistic evidence supports the second criterion. The importance of headaches lies in their frequent appearance as an early symptom of an incipient disorder (“sentinel symptom”). Hence, they provide the opportunity to diagnose early diseases with potentially deleterious consequences. Thus, it is sensible to assess each attack carefully and systematically.

show abstract

Section: Diagnosis Epidemiology Proportion With Headachementioning

confidence: 99%

Approaching Headaches—A Guide to Differential-Diagnostic Considerations and Causal Claims

Pohl

2023

CTN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hematoma expansion has been considered to be one of the most important determinants of neurological deterioration and poor clinical outcomes in the early stage of primary ICH [5]. After ICH, secondary injury occurs as a result of expansion of the hematoma and peri-hematoma edema [6]. Hematoma expansion is an important risk factor involved in the deterioration of neurological function and poor prognosis in the early stage of ICH [7,8].The aim of the present study was to retrospectively investigate the signs of contrast extravasation (spot sign) and other CTA image signs in patients with ICH obtained during the hyperacute period of primary ICH and their relationship with the location, size, morphology, and clinical prognosis of hematomas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictive value of imaging manifestations of supratentorial hemorrhage in hematoma enlargement and clinical prognosis

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionIntracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is an important cause of death and disability. This study aimed to explore the imaging indicators identifying hematoma expansion in primary ICH and to provide a basis for its clinical treatment.Material and methodsHematoma expansion was evaluated by plain computed tomography (CT) scan and multi-detector-row CT angiography (MDCTA).ResultsThis study included a total of 203 patients with intracerebral hemorrhage. The size of the hematoma at the time of admission was 32.5–92.3 mL (average, 45.5 mL). Original or reconstructed MDCTA images with contrast extravasation were available in 35 cases (17.2%). Patients were divided into two groups based on whether or not hematoma expansion had occurred: hematoma expansion group (n = 87) and no hematoma expansion group (n = 116). Patients with spot signs in the two groups were 37.93% and 3.45%, respectively, and those with spot sign ± blend sign ± black hole sign ± island sign (%) were 48.30% and 1.72%, respectively, with significant statistical differences. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of hematoma enlargement were 37.93%, 98.27%, and 94.29% and 67.86%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of blend density sign ± irregular sign in predicting hematoma enlargement in ICH patients were 97.7%, 76.7%, and 75.9% and 97.8%, respectively.ConclusionsBlend density sign ± irregular sign can be used as substitute signs. The more irregular and uneven density the hematoma, the more likely it is that the hematoma will be enlarged.

show abstract

Headache secondary to nontraumatic brain hemorrhage: a single-center, retrospective clinical study

Cited by 2 publications

References 20 publications

Approaching Headaches—A Guide to Differential-Diagnostic Considerations and Causal Claims

Approaching Headaches—A Guide to Differential-Diagnostic Considerations and Causal Claims

Predictive value of imaging manifestations of supratentorial hemorrhage in hematoma enlargement and clinical prognosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About