Cargando…

Capsular warning syndrome: clinical analysis and treatment

BACKGROUND: Capsular warning syndrome (CWS) is a rare clinical syndrome, which is defined as a recurrent transient lacunar syndrome. The mechanism and clinical management of CWS remain unclear. The aim of the study was to discuss the clinical characteristics of CWS and evaluate the different outcome...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: He, Lanying, Xu, Ronghua, Wang, Jian, Zhang, Lili, Zhang, Lijuan, Zhou, Fangfang, Dong, Weiwei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6854731/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31722675
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-019-1522-0
_version_ 1783470268074688512
author He, Lanying
Xu, Ronghua
Wang, Jian
Zhang, Lili
Zhang, Lijuan
Zhou, Fangfang
Dong, Weiwei
author_facet He, Lanying
Xu, Ronghua
Wang, Jian
Zhang, Lili
Zhang, Lijuan
Zhou, Fangfang
Dong, Weiwei
author_sort He, Lanying
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Capsular warning syndrome (CWS) is a rare clinical syndrome, which is defined as a recurrent transient lacunar syndrome. The mechanism and clinical management of CWS remain unclear. The aim of the study was to discuss the clinical characteristics of CWS and evaluate the different outcome between rt-PA and no rt-PA therapy. METHODS: The present multicenter retrospective study involved three medical centers, and the clinical data were collected from patients with CWS between January 2013 and December 2018. The clinical characteristics of CWS were analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups: rt-PA and no rt-PA groups. The therapeutic effects and prognosis of these two groups were analyzed. A good prognosis was defined as 3-month modified Rankin Scale (mRS) ≤ 2. RESULTS: Our study included 72 patients, 27 patients were assigned to rt-PA group, 45 in no rt-PA group. Hypertension and dyslipidemia were the most common risk factors. The mean number of episodes before irreversible neurological impairment or the symptoms completely disappeared was five times (range: 3–11 times). A total of 58 (80.55%) patients had acute infarction lesions on the diffusion weighted imaging (DWI). The most common infarct location was the internal capsule (41,70.69%), followed by the thalamus and pons. The difference in therapeutic effects between the rt-PA, single and double antiplatelet groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). A good prognosis was observed in 61 (84.72%) patients after 3 months, in which 23 (23/27, 85.19%) patients were from the rt-PA group and 38 (38/45,84.44%) patients were from the no rt-PA group (P > 0.05). After 3 months of follow-up, two patients had recurrent ischemic stroke. CONCLUSION: The most effective treatment of CWS remains unclear. Intravenous thrombolysis is safe for CWS patients. Regardless of the high frequency of infarction in CWS patients, more than 80% patients had a favorable functional prognosis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6854731
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68547312019-11-21 Capsular warning syndrome: clinical analysis and treatment He, Lanying Xu, Ronghua Wang, Jian Zhang, Lili Zhang, Lijuan Zhou, Fangfang Dong, Weiwei BMC Neurol Research Article BACKGROUND: Capsular warning syndrome (CWS) is a rare clinical syndrome, which is defined as a recurrent transient lacunar syndrome. The mechanism and clinical management of CWS remain unclear. The aim of the study was to discuss the clinical characteristics of CWS and evaluate the different outcome between rt-PA and no rt-PA therapy. METHODS: The present multicenter retrospective study involved three medical centers, and the clinical data were collected from patients with CWS between January 2013 and December 2018. The clinical characteristics of CWS were analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups: rt-PA and no rt-PA groups. The therapeutic effects and prognosis of these two groups were analyzed. A good prognosis was defined as 3-month modified Rankin Scale (mRS) ≤ 2. RESULTS: Our study included 72 patients, 27 patients were assigned to rt-PA group, 45 in no rt-PA group. Hypertension and dyslipidemia were the most common risk factors. The mean number of episodes before irreversible neurological impairment or the symptoms completely disappeared was five times (range: 3–11 times). A total of 58 (80.55%) patients had acute infarction lesions on the diffusion weighted imaging (DWI). The most common infarct location was the internal capsule (41,70.69%), followed by the thalamus and pons. The difference in therapeutic effects between the rt-PA, single and double antiplatelet groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). A good prognosis was observed in 61 (84.72%) patients after 3 months, in which 23 (23/27, 85.19%) patients were from the rt-PA group and 38 (38/45,84.44%) patients were from the no rt-PA group (P > 0.05). After 3 months of follow-up, two patients had recurrent ischemic stroke. CONCLUSION: The most effective treatment of CWS remains unclear. Intravenous thrombolysis is safe for CWS patients. Regardless of the high frequency of infarction in CWS patients, more than 80% patients had a favorable functional prognosis. BioMed Central 2019-11-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6854731/ /pubmed/31722675 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-019-1522-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
He, Lanying
Xu, Ronghua
Wang, Jian
Zhang, Lili
Zhang, Lijuan
Zhou, Fangfang
Dong, Weiwei
Capsular warning syndrome: clinical analysis and treatment
title Capsular warning syndrome: clinical analysis and treatment
title_full Capsular warning syndrome: clinical analysis and treatment
title_fullStr Capsular warning syndrome: clinical analysis and treatment
title_full_unstemmed Capsular warning syndrome: clinical analysis and treatment
title_short Capsular warning syndrome: clinical analysis and treatment
title_sort capsular warning syndrome: clinical analysis and treatment
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6854731/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31722675
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-019-1522-0
work_keys_str_mv AT helanying capsularwarningsyndromeclinicalanalysisandtreatment
AT xuronghua capsularwarningsyndromeclinicalanalysisandtreatment
AT wangjian capsularwarningsyndromeclinicalanalysisandtreatment
AT zhanglili capsularwarningsyndromeclinicalanalysisandtreatment
AT zhanglijuan capsularwarningsyndromeclinicalanalysisandtreatment
AT zhoufangfang capsularwarningsyndromeclinicalanalysisandtreatment
AT dongweiwei capsularwarningsyndromeclinicalanalysisandtreatment