Evidence Hub

Migrainous Infarction And Cerebral Vasospasm: Case Report And Literature Review

Luisa Vinciguerra, Mariagiovanna Cantone, G. Lanza, A. Bramanti, P. Santalucia, V. Puglisi, G. Pennisi, R. Bella

Journal of Pain Research, 2019

119 participants · 18 citations

Abstract

Abstract Migrainous infarction (MI) is a rare complication of migraines that accounts for 0.5–1.5% of all ischemic strokes. Although the pathogenesis of MI is still debated, cortical spreading depression and the consequent biochemical cascade and hemodynamic changes are presumed to play an important role. Here we describe a case of MI and systematically review the literature on the complex and possibly bidirectional relationship between migraine and stroke. A 44-year-old female with history of migraine with visual aura presented at the Emergency Department due to a sudden onset of left limb paresis and hypoesthesia. Brain magnetic resonance imaging revealed right fronto-parietal ischemic stroke. Two days after hospitalization, the patient experienced a prolonged visual aura and showed ultrasound evidence of intracranial artery vasospasm. To date, there have been 33 published articles on a total 119 patients with MI, although intracranial vasospasm has rarely been reported. Sustained hyperexcitability of cortical neurons, impairment of γ-aminobutyric acid inhibitory circuitry, altered serotonergic transmission, release of vasoconstrictive molecules, and cerebral blood flow changes have been proposed as pathogenic mechanisms of MI. The present case provides insight into the pathophysiological link between stroke and migraine, thus aiding clinicians in therapeutic decision-making although additional studies are needed to clarify the clinical, neuroradiological, and ultrasound…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 119 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free