Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 11096755

Stroke in Children.

Abstract

Identification and treatment of the underlying risk factors for stroke reduce the potential for additional strokes; therefore, a thorough search for treatable risk factors is justified. Because some risk factors can have a cumulative effect, even children with known risk factors for stroke sometimes need to be evaluated for other conditions. Cerebral angiography is often helpful; I recommend angiography in any child with an unexplained infarction or hemorrhage. Angiography is especially important in children with intraparenchymal hemorrhage because more than one third of such children will prove to have some type of potentially treatable congenital vascular anomaly such as an arteriovenous malformation (AVM) or aneurysm. The evidence that periodic blood transfusion effectively prevents cerebral infarction due to sickle cell disease is compelling. Transfusions apparently must be continued indefinitely to maintain the reduction of stroke risk, and without iron chelation, chronic transfusion eventually results in severe iron toxicity and, most likely, death, so the decision to begin transfusion is not an easy one. Measurement of the time-averaged mean flow velocity in the large cerebral vessels with transcranial Doppler (TCD) is highly predictive of stroke risk in these children, enough to justify its routine use in screening patients with sickle cell disease for stroke risk. I believe that patients with sickle cell disease should be offered chronic transfusion after an initial large-vessel stroke or when the TCD results suggest a high risk of stroke. The family must be made aware of the serious complications of chronic transfusion and the importance of complying with chelation once it is started. There are no controlled clinical trials to guide the use of anticoagulants, antiplatelet agents, or thrombolytic agents in children, although these drugs are being used more and more often in pediatric patients. For the most part, our approach has been adapted from our experience with adults. Heparin followed by warfarin is often used for sinovenous thrombosis and for arterial dissection. I also suggest long-term anticoagulation for children with coagulopathy or a high risk of embolism due to congenital or acquired cardiac disease. It is reasonable to use a thrombolytic agent in children with an acute infarction; because few children present soon enough after the onset of symptoms, however, thrombolysis is infrequently used. Aspirin is used more than other antiplatelet agents in children, largely because of years of experience with aspirin and the lack of evidence that other agents are more effective. Despite its frequent use, there are no unequivocal indications for the use of aspirin in children. Aspirin is often started empirically in children suspected to be at substantial risk for additional ischemic stroke but whose risk is ill defined, an approach not too dissimilar from that often used in adult patients. Although the risk of Reye's syndrome in a child taking daily aspirin for stroke prevention is a common concern, I know of no published examples of children who developed Reye's syndrome while taking prophylactic aspirin. This apparently low risk must be weighed against the often-considerable risk of ischemic stroke that could be reduced by the use of daily aspirin. In situations such as vasculopathy or infarction of unknown cause, the small risk of Reye's syndrome seems acceptable.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

ES Roach. 2000. Stroke in Children.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11940-000-0047-5

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗