• Hermann Neugebauer, Claire J Creutzfeldt, J Claude Hemphill, Peter U Heuschmann, and Eric Jüttler.
• Department of Neurology, RKU - University- and Rehabilitation Hospitals Ulm, Oberer Eselsberg 45, 89081, Ulm, Germany, hermann.neugebauer@uni-ulm.de.
• Neurocrit Care. 2014 Aug 1; 21 (1): 27-34.

BackgroundDecompressive hemicraniectomy (DHC) reduces mortality and improves outcome after malignant middle cerebral artery (MCA) infarction but leaves a high number of survivors severely disabled. Attitudes among physicians toward the degree of disability that is considered acceptable and the impact of aphasia may play a major role in treatment decisions.MethodsDESTINY-S is a multicenter, international, cross-sectional survey among 1,860 physicians potentially involved in the treatment of malignant MCA infarction. Questions concerned the grade of disability, the hemisphere of the stroke, and the preferred treatment for malignant MCA infarction.ResultsmRS scores of 3 or better were considered acceptable by the majority of respondents (79.3%). Only few considered a mRS score of 5 still acceptable (5.8%). A mRS score of 4 was considered acceptable by 38.0%. Involved hemisphere (dominant vs. non-dominant) was considered a major clinical symptom influencing treatment decisions in 47.7% of respondents, also reflected by significantly different rates for DHC as preferred treatment in dominant versus non-dominant hemispheric infarction (46.9 vs. 72.9%). Significant differences in acceptable disability and treatment decisions were found among geographic regions, medical specialties, and respondents with different work experiences.ConclusionLittle consensus exists among physicians regarding acceptable outcome and therapeutic management after malignant MCA infarction, and physician's recommendations do not correlate with available evidence. We advocate for a decision-making process that balances scientific evidence, patient preference, and clinical expertise.

17 keywords...

hide…