Continuous irrigation with thrombolytics for intraventricular hemorrhage: case–control study

• Published in: Neurosurgical review Vol. 47; no. 1; p. 40
• Main Authors: Carrera, Diego A., Mabray, Marc C., Torbey, Michel T., Andrada, Jason E., Nelson, Danika E., Sarangarm, Preeyaporn, Spader, Heather, Cole, Chad D., Carlson, Andrew P.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 10.01.2024
• Subjects: Brain; Case-Control Studies; Cerebral Hemorrhage - drug therapy; Cerebral Hemorrhage - surgery; Fibrinolytic Agents - therapeutic use; Humans; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Neurosurgery; Intraventricular hemorrhage; Continuous irrigation; Intracerebral hemorrhage; Intraventricular thrombolysis
• ISSN: 1437-2320; 0344-5607; 1437-2320
• DOI: 10.1007/s10143-023-02270-3

Intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) is a complication of a spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage. Standard treatment is with external ventricular drain (EVD). Intraventricular thrombolysis may improve mortality but does not improve functional outcomes. We present our initial experience with a novel irrigating EVD (IRRAflow) that automates continuous irrigation with thrombolysis. Single-center case–control study including patients with IVH treated with EVD compared to IRRAflow. We compared standard demographics, treatment, and outcome parameters between groups. We developed a brain phantom injected with a human clot and assessed clot clearance using EVD/IRRAflow approaches with CT imaging. Twenty-one patients were treated with standard EVD and 9 patients with IRRAflow. Demographics were similar between groups. Thirty-three percent of patients with EVD also had at least one dose of t-PA and 89% of patients with IRRAflow received irrigation with t-PA ( p  = 0.01). Mean drain days were 8.8 for EVD versus 4.1 for IRRAflow ( p  = 0.02). Days-to-clearance of ventricular outflow was 5.8 for EVD versus 2.5 for IRRAflow ( p  = 0.02). Overall clearance was not different. Thirty-seven percent of EVD patients achieved good outcome (mRS ≥ 3) at 90 days versus 86% of IRRAflow patients ( p  = 0.03). Assessing only t-PA, reduction in mean days-to-clearance ( p  = 0.0004) and ICU days ( p  = 0.04) was observed. In the benchtop model, the clot treated with IRRAflow and t-PA showed a significant reduction of volume compared to control. Irrigation with IRRAflow and t-PA is feasible and safe for patients with IVH. Improving clot clearance with IRRAflow may result in improved clinical outcomes and should be incorporated into randomized trials.