↓ Skip to main content

What does the CT angiography “spot sign” of intracerebral hemorrhage mean in modern neurosurgical settings with minimally invasive endoscopic techniques?

Overview of attention for article published in Neurosurgical Review, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
What does the CT angiography “spot sign” of intracerebral hemorrhage mean in modern neurosurgical settings with minimally invasive endoscopic techniques?
Published in
Neurosurgical Review, December 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10143-012-0437-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Toru Nagasaka, Suguru Inao, Toshihiko Wakabayashi

Abstract

Hematoma expansion is correlated with morbidity and mortality for patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). Recent studies demonstrated that contrast extravasation on contrast-enhanced CT and small-enhancing foci, so-called spot signs, on CT angiography are associated with subsequent hematoma enlargement. Such radiological markers of ICH may have significant implications not only as a surrogate marker for hematoma expansion in medical hemostatic therapy but also as indication for surgery. In this article, a brief description of contrast extravasation and "spot sign" will be provided first. The findings of some of the important trials that shaped the current landscape of therapeutic interventions for ICH will then be reviewed. Many neurosurgeons have faced a significant dilemma since the Surgical Trial in Intracerebral Haemorrhage (STICH) trial was published. Under adverse circumstances, many neurosurgeons assume that minimally invasive surgical interventions are still likely to benefit some patients and will be more effective. Among future candidate strategies for ICH, the most promising is neuroendoscopic surgery with direct hemostatic devices, which attains direct local hemostasis at the sites of vascular rupture. It is plausible that ultra-early direct hemostatic surgery given in the emergency setting might reduce hematoma volume and rebleeding and improve outcome. Finally, a description of future avenues of minimally invasive surgery for ICH treatment and suggestions for the design of further studies using reliable predictor of hematoma expansion spot sign will be provided. Neuroendoscopic interventions are minimally invasive and are likely of benefit in hemostasis and hematoma removal. On the basis of these observations, the spot sign of ICH has sub-emergency surgical implications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 28 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 5 16%
Other 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Researcher 2 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 9 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 48%
Neuroscience 3 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Design 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 March 2023.
All research outputs
#7,409,068
of 23,510,717 outputs
Outputs from Neurosurgical Review
#106
of 656 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,312
of 283,184 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurosurgical Review
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,510,717 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 656 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 283,184 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.