ABSTRACT
Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) can cause acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to large vessel occlusion (LVO). Some cases of COVID-19-related LVO are known to be resistant to mechanical thrombectomy and have different characteristics from non-COVID-19-related LVO. Inflammation of the occluded arterial wall is suspected as one of the causes of such differences, but the exact mechanism is not fully understood. A 52-year-old man suffered from AIS due to left vertebral artery (VA) occlusion during the recovery period after mild COVID-19. Successful recanalization of the left VA was achieved with antithrombotic therapy, but a late and reversible edematous lesion appeared in part of the brainstem adjacent to the left VA, with abnormal enhancement in both the left VA wall and medulla oblongata on postcontrast magnetic resonance imaging. We suggest that the left VA wall inflammation, induced by COVID-19, caused the ischemic stroke and extended to the brainstem, and an incidental thrombosed unruptured aneurysm of the left VA accelerated these changes. This case provides the first evidence of LVO after COVID-19 in which the pathological conditions in the brainstem adjacent to the affected artery could be observed with neuroimaging and inflammation of the arterial wall was indirectly confirmed. Physicians should be aware that unconventional ischemic stroke may develop in some patients during the recovery period after COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Segmental arterial mediolysis (SAM) is an uncommon vascular disease, which manifests as catastrophic intraabdominal hemorrhage caused by rupture of visceral dissecting aneurysms in most cases. The etiology of SAM is still unclear, but SAM may be a vasospastic disorder and the responsible pressor agent is norepinephrine. Recently, abdominal SAM coexisting with intracranial dissecting aneurysms has been reported, but the relationship between intraabdominal and intracranial aneurysms in SAM remains unclear, as no cases of concomitant abdominal SAM and ruptured intracranial saccular aneurysm have been reported. CASE DESCRIPTION: A 49-year-old woman underwent emergent clipping for a ruptured saccular aneurysm at the left C1 portion of the internal carotid artery. Intraoperatively, norepinephrine was continuously administered intravenously under general anesthesia. Four days after the subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), the patient suddenly developed shock due to massive hematoma in the abdominal cavity. Imaging showed multiple aneurysms involving the splenic artery, gastroduodenal artery, common hepatic artery, and superior mesenteric artery. Coil embolization of the splenic artery was performed immediately to prevent bleeding. Subsequent treatment for cerebral vasospasm following SAH was performed with prevention of hypertension, and the patient recovered with left temporal lobe infarction. The diagnosis was abdominal SAM based on the clinical, imaging, and laboratory findings. CONCLUSION: Norepinephrine release induced by SAH and/or iatrogenic administration of norepinephrine may have promoted abdominal SAM in this case. Abdominal SAM may occur subsequent to rupture of ordinary saccular aneurysm, and may provoke catastrophic abdominal hemorrhage in the spasm stage after SAH.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate wall discontinuity, as observed using 64-slice multidetector-row computed tomography (64-MDCT), as a direct finding (DF) indicating the perforation site in patients with gastrointestinal (GI) tract perforations. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 41 consecutive patients presenting with acute abdomen and exhibiting extraluminal air (EA) on 64-MDCT. Three readers evaluated the distribution of EA, extraluminal faeces, dirty mass, dirty fat sign, extraluminal fluid collection and bowel wall thickening (i.e. conventional findings, CFs) as well as DFs. RESULTS: Twenty-two cases were surgically or endoscopically confirmed to have upper GI tract perforations, and 19 had lower GI tract perforations. The DFs correctly identified the sites of perforation in 80.5% of patients when 2-mm-thick imaging slices were used. For the detection of upper GI tract perforations, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 95.5%, 94.7% and 95.1% for the DFs and 50.0%, 100% and 73.2% for the CFs, respectively. Significant differences in sensitivity (p < 0.001) and diagnostic accuracy (p < 0.05) were observed between the DFs and CFs for upper GI perforations but not for lower GI tract perforations. CONCLUSION: DFs of the perforation site by using 64-MDCT were more sensitive and accurate than CFs for the detection of upper GI tract perforations.
