Cognitive outcome in acute simvastatin treatment for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: A propensity matched analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Experimental evidence has indicated the benefit of simvastatin in the treatment of subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). Recently, acute simvastatin treatment was not shown to be beneficial in neurological outcome using modified Rankin Scale. Cognitive function is another important dimension of outcome assessment and yet had not been investigated in statin studies for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. We therefore explored whether acute simvastatin treatment would improve cognitive outcomes. METHODS: The study recruited SAH patients with acute simvastatin treatment enrolled in a randomized controlled double-blinded clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01038193). A control cohort of SAH patients without simvastatin treatment was identified with propensity score matching of age and admission grade. Primary outcome measure was Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Secondary outcome measures were delayed ischaemic deficit (DID), delayed cerebral infarction, modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). RESULTS: Fifty-one SAH patients with acute simvastatin treatment and 51 SAH patients without simvastatin treatment were recruited for analysis. At 3 months, there were no differences in MoCA scores (MoCA: 21+/-6 vs. 21+/-5, p=0.772). MoCA-assessed cognitive impairment (MoCA<26) was not different (75% vs. 80%, OR 0.7, 95%CI 0.3 to 1.8, p=0.477). There were also no differences in DID, delayed cerebral infarction, favorable mRS outcome, and MMSE scores, and MMSE-assessed cognitive impairment between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The current study does not support that acute simvastatin treatment improves cognitive outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.

Intravenous magnesium sulphate for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (IMASH): a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase III trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Pilot clinical trials using magnesium sulfate in patients with acute aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage have reported trends toward improvement in clinical outcomes. This Phase III study aimed to compare intravenous magnesium sulfate infusion with saline placebo among such patients. METHODS: We recruited patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage within 48 hours of onset from 10 participating centers. The patients were randomly assigned to magnesium sulfate infusion titrated to a serum magnesium concentration twice the baseline concentration or saline placebo for 10 to 14 days. Patients and assessors were blinded to treatment allocation. The study is registered at www.strokecenter.org/trials (as Intravenous Magnesium Sulphate for Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage [IMASH]) and www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00124150). RESULTS: Of the 327 patients recruited, 169 were randomized to receive treatment with intravenous magnesium sulfate and 158 to receive saline (placebo). The proportions of patients with a favorable outcome at 6 months (Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale 5 to 8) were similar, 64% in the magnesium sulfate group and 63% in the saline group (OR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.7 to 1.6). Secondary outcome analyses (modified Rankin Scale, Barthel Index, Short Form 36, and clinical vasospasm) also showed no significant differences between the 2 groups. Predefined subgroups included age, admission World Federation of Neurological Surgeons grade, pre-existing hypertension, intracerebral hematoma, intraventricular hemorrhage, location of aneurysm, size of aneurysm, and mode of aneurysm treatment. In none of the subgroups did the magnesium sulfate group show a better outcome at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: The results do not support a clinical benefit of intravenous magnesium sulfate infusion over placebo infusion in patients with acute aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.