↓ Skip to main content

Craniocervical Arterial Dissection in Children: Diagnosis and Treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Current Treatment Options in Neurology, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#6 of 501)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
143 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
148 Mendeley
Title
Craniocervical Arterial Dissection in Children: Diagnosis and Treatment
Published in
Current Treatment Options in Neurology, October 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11940-011-0149-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicholas V. Stence, Laura Z. Fenton, Neil A. Goldenberg, Jennifer Armstrong-Wells, Timothy J. Bernard

Abstract

Diagnosis of craniocervical arterial dissection (CCAD) in children begins with a careful history and physical in a child with a transient ischemic attack (TIA) or arterial ischemic stroke (AIS). The extent of radiologic evaluation for suspected CCAD is based upon careful consideration of the risks associated with the best imaging techniques, weighed against the benefits of enhanced vascular imaging with better diagnostic sensitivity. Although conventional angiography (CA) and CT angiography (CTA) have a higher sensitivity than magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), they are accompanied by risks: for CA, femoral hematoma, femoral arterial pseudoaneurysm, recurrent AIS, and radiation exposure; for CTA, radiation. For children (non-neonates) with suspected CCAD, MRI with MRA is recommended as the first-line imaging study. MRI usually includes diffusion-weighted, FLAIR, and T1 images of the brain, and T1 or T2 fat-saturation axial imaging through the neck. MRA should include 3D time-of-flight MRA of the head and neck (from the aortic arch through the circle of Willis). Contrast-enhanced MRA should be highly considered in neck imaging. If MRI/MRA is equivocal, CCAD is strongly suspected but not detected on MRI/MRA (especially in the posterior circulation), or the child has recurrent events, additional imaging of the craniocervical vasculature is likely warranted. Individual clinical circumstances warrant careful, case-by-case consideration. Treatment of CCAD in children is challenging and differs for intracranial and extracranial dissections. In extracranial CCAD, we most commonly use anticoagulation for 6 weeks to 6 months in patients with TIA or AIS. Typically, unfractionated heparin is used in the acutely ill patient at heightened risk for bleeding (because of its short half-life), whereas low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or warfarin are reserved for the stable patient. If the history is suspicious for dissection (head and neck trauma, recent cervical chiropractic manipulation, recent car accident, or neck pain), we consider treatment for dissection even with normal MRI/MRA. For patients with CCAD with a stroke size greater than one third to one half of the middle cerebral artery territory (or other bleeding risk factors) and extracranial CCAD, in whom there is concern about heightened risk for hemorrhagic conversion, we commonly use aspirin therapy during the acute phase. Regardless of their treatment in the initial weeks to months, we subsequently treat all patients with aspirin for 1 year after their event, and sometimes longer if they have other risk factors. Interventional techniques, such as extracranial cerebral arterial stent placement or selective occlusion, are understudied in children. Interventional techniques are typically reserved for patients who fail aggressive medical management and have recurrent TIA or AIS. The diagnosis and treatment of intracranial dissection is extraordinarily challenging in children, in whom inflammatory intracranial arteriopathies are common. When intracranial arteriopathy is clearly associated with dissection, the clinician should look for the presence of subarachnoid hemorrhage and/or dissecting aneurysm. Treatment decisions should be made by a multidisciplinary pediatric stroke team, given the lack of data in this area. Intracranial cerebral artery stent placement carries high risk and is not recommended for intracranial CCAD in children. Most importantly, we educate all children with CCAD and their parents about the paucity of evidence in the treatment of this disease, the risks of enhanced imaging techniques such as CTA or CA, and the challenges involved in weighing the risks of aggressive therapies and interventions against the costs of unclear diagnosis and potentially ineffective treatments. We also educate our patients with CCAD about the signs and symptoms of recurrence and the importance of emergent evaluation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 143 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 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 145 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 14%
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Student > Postgraduate 16 11%
Other 13 9%
Researcher 13 9%
Other 44 30%
Unknown 25 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 73 49%
Neuroscience 12 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 10 7%
Unknown 33 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 110. 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 12 November 2021.
All research outputs
#386,860
of 25,959,914 outputs
Outputs from Current Treatment Options in Neurology
#6
of 501 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,406
of 151,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Treatment Options in Neurology
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,959,914 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 501 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 151,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them