The Prognostic Roles of Perihematomal Edema and Ventricular Size in Patients with Intracerebral Hemorrhage
Lee KH, Lioutas VA, Marchina S, Selim M
Neurocritical care. 2022
BACKGROUND Conflicting data exist regarding the association of perihematomal edema (PHE) with outcomes after intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). We performed a post hoc analysis of the ICH Deferoxamine trial to examine whether an early change in ventricular size (VS), as a composite measure of PHE growth and mass effect, intraventricular hemorrhage, and hydrocephalus, is a more accurate predictor of outcome than PHE measures alone. METHODS Computerized tomography scans were performed at baseline and after 72-96 h. We evaluated measures of PHE and change in VS as predictors of outcome, assessed by a dichotomized modified Rankin Scale score (0-2 versus 3-6), primarily at 90 days and secondarily at 30 days. A multivariable logistic regression model was fitted for each predictor, with adjustment for the same confounders. RESULTS A total of 248 participants were included after we excluded those requiring external ventricular drains. On univariate analyses, older age, female sex, lower Glasgow Coma Scale score and baseline temperature, greater ICH volume, absolute PHE volume, edema extension distance at presentation, lesser changes in relative PHE volume and edema extension distance, and an increase in VS were associated with poor outcome. In multivariable analyses, only the increase in VS was associated with lower odds of modified Rankin Scale scores 0-2 at 90 days (odds ratio 0.927, 95% confidence interval 0.866-0.970, p = 0.001) and 30 days (odds ratio 0.931, 95% confidence interval 0.888-0.975, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS Within the context of a randomized controlled trial with standardized imaging and functional assessments, we did not find significant associations between measures of PHE and outcome but documented an independent association between early increase in VS and lower odds of good clinical outcome.
Perihematomal Edema and Clinical Outcome After Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Marchina S, Trevino-Calderon JA, Hassani S, Massaro JM, Lioutas VA, Carvalho F, Selim M
Neurocritical care. 2022
BACKGROUND Perihematomal edema (PHE) has been proposed as a radiological marker of secondary injury and therapeutic target in intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the prognostic impact of PHE on functional outcome and mortality in patients with ICH. METHODS We searched major databases through December 2020 using predefined keywords. Any study using logistic regression to examine the association between PHE or its growth and functional outcome was included. We examined the overall pooled effect and conducted secondary analyses to explore the impact of individual PHE measures on various outcomes separately. Study quality was assessed by three independent raters using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Odds ratios (per 1-unit increase in PHE) and their confidence intervals (CIs) were log transformed and entered into a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis to obtain pooled estimates of the effect. RESULTS Twenty studies (n = 6633 patients) were included in the analysis. The pooled effect size for overall outcome was 1.05 (95% CI 1.02-1.08; p < 0.00). For the following secondary analyses, the effect size was weak: mortality (1.01; 95% CI 0.90-1.14), functional outcome (1.04; 95% CI 1.02-1.07), both 90-day (1.06; 95% CI 1.02-1.11), and in-hospital assessments (1.04; 95% CI 1.00-1.08). The effect sizes for PHE volume and PHE growth were 1.04 (95% CI 1.01-1.07) and 1.14 (95% CI 1.04-1.25), respectively. Heterogeneity across studies was substantial except for PHE growth. CONCLUSIONS This meta-analysis demonstrates that PHE volume within the first 72 h after ictus has a weak effect on functional outcome and mortality after ICH, whereas PHE growth might have a slightly larger impact during this time frame. Definitive conclusions are limited by the large variability of PHE measures, heterogeneity, and different evaluation time points between studies.
Deferoxamine mesylate in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage (i-DEF): a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 2 trial
Selim M, Foster LD, Moy CS, Xi G, Hill MD, Morgenstern LB, Greenberg SM, James ML, Singh V, Clark WM, et al
The Lancet. Neurology. 2019
Free full text
BACKGROUND Iron from haemolysed blood is implicated in secondary injury after intracerebral haemorrhage. We aimed to assess the safety of the iron chelator deferoxamine mesylate in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage and to establish whether the drug merits investigation in a phase 3 trial. METHODS We did a multicentre, futility-design, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial at 40 hospitals in Canada and the USA. Adults aged 18-80 years with primary, spontaneous, supratentorial intracerebral haemorrhage were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive deferoxamine mesylate (32 mg/kg per day) or placebo (saline) infusions for 3 consecutive days within 24 h of haemorrhage onset. Randomisation was done via a web-based trial-management system centrally in real time, and treatment allocation was concealed from both participants and investigators. The primary outcome was good clinical outcome, which was defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2 at day 90. We did a futility analysis: if the 90% upper confidence bound of the absolute risk difference between the two groups in the proportion of participants with a good clinical outcome was less than 12% in favour of deferoxamine mesylate, then to move to a phase 3 efficacy trial would be futile. Primary outcome and safety data were analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population, comprising only participants in whom the study infusions were initiated. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02175225, and is completed. FINDINGS We recruited 294 participants between Nov 23, 2014, and Nov 10, 2017. The modified intention-to-treat population consisted of 144 patients assigned to the deferoxamine mesylate group and 147 assigned to the placebo group. At day 90, among patients with available data for the primary outcome, 48 (34%) of 140 participants in the deferoxamine mesylate group, and 47 (33%) of 143 patients in the placebo group, had modified Rankin Scale scores of 0-2 (adjusted absolute risk difference 0.6% [90% upper confidence bound 6.8%]). By day 90, 70 serious adverse events were reported in 39 (27%) of 144 patients in the deferoxamine mesylate group, and 78 serious adverse events were reported in 49 (33%) of 147 patients in the placebo group. Ten (7%) participants in the deferoxamine mesylate and 11 (7%) in the placebo group died. None of the deaths were judged to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION Deferoxamine mesylate was safe. However, the primary result showed that further study of the efficacy of deferoxamine mesylate with anticipation that the drug would significantly improve the chance of good clinical outcome (ie, mRS score of 0-2) at day 90 would be futile. FUNDING US National Institutes of Health and US National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.