Predictors of clinical outcomes in space-occupying cerebellar infarction undergoing suboccipital decompressive craniectomy

Volumetry as a Criterion for Suboccipital Craniectomy after Cerebellar Infarction

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the use of image-guided volumetry in cerebellar infarction during the decision-making process for surgery. Particular emphasis was placed on the ratio of the infarction volume to the cerebellar volume or cranial posterior fossa volume. Methods: A retrospective, multicenter, multidisciplinary study design was selected. Statistical methods such as regression analysis and ROC analysis included the volumetric data of the infarction, the posterior fossa and the cerebellum itself as new factors. Results: Thirty-eight patients (mean age 75 (SD: 13.93) years, 16 (42%) female patients) were included. The mean infarction volume was 37.79 (SD: 25.24) cm3. Patients treated surgically had a 2.05-fold larger infarction than those managed without surgery (p ≤ 0.001). Medical and surgical treatment revealed a significant difference in the ratio of the cranial posterior fossa volume to the infarction volume (medical 12.05, SD:9.09; surgical 5.14, SD: 5,65; p ≤ 0.001) and the ratio of the cerebellar volume to the infarction volume (medical 8.55, SD: 5.97; surgical 3.82, SD: 3.39; p ≤ 0.001). Subsequent multivariate regression analysis for surgical therapy showed significant results only for the posterior fossa volume to infarction volume ratio ≤/> 4:1 (OR: 1.162, CI: 1.007-1.341, p = 0.04). Younger (≤60 years) patients also had a significantly better outcome at discharge (p ≤ 0.017). A cut-off value for the infarction volume of 31.35 cm3 (sensitivity = 0.875, specificity = 0.2) was determined for the necessity of surgery. Conclusions: Volumetric data on the infarction, the posterior fossa and the cerebellum itself could be meaningful in decision-making towards surgery.

Endoscopic Cerebellar Necrosectomy for Space-occupying Cerebellar Infarction: A Case Report

Suboccipital decompressive craniectomy with or without resection of necrosis is the preferred treatment for space-occupying cerebellar infarctions with neurological deterioration due to brainstem compression and obstructive hydrocephalus. We herein present our experience with treating space-occupying cerebellar infarctions successfully using endoscopic necrosectomy. A total of 27 patients were admitted to our hospital due to cerebellar infarctions between April 2021 and November 2023. Four patients required surgical interventions due to a drop in consciousness level or compression of the fourth ventricle and brainstem with acute hydrocephalus confirmed by a computed tomography (CT) scan. Three patients were performed endoscopic necrosectomy through a burr hole in a supine-lateral position. Removing most of the necrotic tissue was possible, resulting in early decompression of the fourth ventricle and brainstem. Endoscopic necrosectomy is less invasive than suboccipital decompressive craniectomy. An endoscopic necrosectomy can be performed for patients with unstable health conditions in a supine-lateral position. Therefore, endoscopic necrosectomy might be an effective method for treating patients with space-occupying cerebellar infarctions and poor general condition, although an objective evaluation of the extent and degree of removal is needed.

Functional Outcomes in Conservatively vs Surgically Treated Cerebellar Infarcts

Importance

According to the current American Heart Association/American Stroke Association guidelines, decompressive surgery is indicated in patients with cerebellar infarcts that demonstrate severe cerebellar swelling. However, there is no universal definition of swelling and/or infarct volume(s) available to support a decision for surgery.

Objective

To evaluate functional outcomes in surgically compared with conservatively managed patients with cerebellar infarcts.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, patients with cerebellar infarcts treated at 5 tertiary referral hospitals or stroke centers within Germany between 2008 and 2021 were included. Data were analyzed from November 2020 to November 2023.

Exposures

Surgical treatment (ie, posterior fossa decompression plus standard of care) vs conservative management (ie, medical standard of care).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome examined was functional status evaluated by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at discharge and 1-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the predicted probabilities for favorable outcome (mRS score of 0 to 3) stratified by infarct volumes or Glasgow Coma Scale score at admission and treatment modality. Analyses included propensity score matching, with adjustments for age, sex, Glasgow Coma Scale score at admission, brainstem involvement, and infarct volume.

Results

Of 531 included patients with cerebellar infarcts, 301 (57%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 68 (14.4) years. After propensity score matching, a total of 71 patients received surgical treatment and 71 patients conservative treatment. There was no significant difference in favorable outcomes (ie, mRS score of 0 to 3) at discharge for those treated surgically vs conservatively (47 [66%] vs 45 [65%]; odds ratio, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.5-2.2; P > .99) or at follow-up (35 [73%] vs 33 [61%]; odds ratio, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.7-4.2; P > .99). In patients with cerebellar infarct volumes of 35 mL or greater, surgical treatment was associated with a significant improvement in favorable outcomes at 1-year follow-up (38 [61%] vs 3 [25%]; odds ratio, 4.8; 95% CI, 1.2-19.3; P = .03), while conservative treatment was associated with favorable outcomes at 1-year follow-up in patients with infarct volumes of less than 25 mL (2 [34%] vs 218 [74%]; odds ratio, 0.2; 95% CI, 0-1.0; P = .047).

Conclusions and Relevance

Overall, surgery was not associated with improved outcomes compared with conservative management in patients with cerebellar infarcts. However, when stratifying based on infarct volume, surgical treatment appeared to be beneficial in patients with larger infarct volumes, while conservative management appeared favorable in patients with smaller infarct volumes.

Neurological update: neuro-otology 2023

Much has changed since our last review of recent advances in neuro-otology 7 years ago. Unfortunately there are still not many practising neuro-otologists, so that most patients with vestibular problems need, in the first instance, to be evaluated and treated by neurologists whose special expertise is not neuro-otology. The areas we consider here are mostly those that almost any neurologist should be able to start managing: acute spontaneous vertigo in the Emergency Room-is it vestibular neuritis or posterior circulation stroke; recurrent spontaneous vertigo in the office-is it vestibular migraine or Meniere's disease and the most common vestibular problem of all-benign positional vertigo. Finally we consider the future: long-term vestibular monitoring and the impact of machine learning on vestibular diagnosis.