Off-label use of IV t-PA in patients with intracranial neoplasm and cavernoma

Background:The safety of systemic thrombolysis in patients with intracranial tumor and cavernoma are unknown. So far evidence is limited to a number of case reports and few case series or unspecified data based on population-based analysis. Our aim was to comprehend the risk of systemic thrombolysis...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Schwarzbach, Christopher Jan (Author) , Ebert, Anne (Author) , Hennerici, Michael G. (Author) , Neumaier-Probst, Eva (Author) , Platten, Michael (Author) , Fatar, Marc (Author)
Format: Article (Journal)
Language:English
Published: February 5, 2018
In: Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders
Year: 2018, Volume: 11
ISSN:1756-2864
DOI:10.1177/1756285617753423
Online Access:Verlag, kostenfrei, Volltext: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1756285617753423
Verlag, kostenfrei, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.1177/1756285617753423
Get full text
Author Notes:Christopher Jan Schwarzbach, Anne Ebert, Michael G. Hennerici, Eva Neumaier-Probst, Michael Platten and Marc Fatar
Description
Summary:Background:The safety of systemic thrombolysis in patients with intracranial tumor and cavernoma are unknown. So far evidence is limited to a number of case reports and few case series or unspecified data based on population-based analysis. Our aim was to comprehend the risk of systemic thrombolysis in these patients.Methods:Patients with additional evidence of intracranial tumor or cavernoma who received IV tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) treatment at our comprehensive stroke center over a period of 7 years were identified in our stroke database and compared to the same number of matched control subjects without any evidence of intracranial tumor and cavernoma. Clinical history and imaging patterns before and after t-PA therapy were individually reviewed for each patient.Results:Thirty-four patients with additional evidence of meningioma (19/34), cavernoma (13/34) or malignant intracranial neoplasm (2/34) were identified. The incidence of secondary intracranial hemorrhage observed showed no difference between control subjects (9/34, 26%) and patients (6/34, 18%; p = 0.56). Symptomatic hemorrhage in patients with meningioma or cavernoma could not be observed. Likewise, the prevalence of stroke mimics showed no difference between patients (8/34, 24%) and control subjects (5/34, 15%; p = 0.54). However, both patients with malignant intracranial neoplasm presented with a stroke mimic and intracranial hemorrhage was observed in one of them.Conclusions:In compliance with existing evidence, treatment in patients with meningioma and cavernoma appears to be safe and reasonable, while the therapy should be avoided in patients with malignant intracranial neoplasm with blood?brain barrier disruption.
Item Description:Gesehen am 19.04.2018
Physical Description:Online Resource
ISSN:1756-2864
DOI:10.1177/1756285617753423