rss
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2008;79:943-946 doi:10.1136/jnnp.2007.131664
  • Research paper

Proposed diagnostic criteria for intracranial infectious aneurysms

  1. S Kannoth1,
  2. S V Thomas1,
  3. S Nair2,
  4. P S Sarma3
  1. 1
    Department of Neurology, Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, Trivandrum, India
  2. 2
    Department of Neurosurgery, Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, Trivandrum, India
  3. 3
    Achutha Menon Centre for Health Science Studies, Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, Trivandrum, India
  1. Dr S V Thomas, Department of Neurology, Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, Trivandrum 695011, India; sanjeev.v.thomas{at}gmail.com
  • Received 2 August 2007
  • Revised 12 February 2008
  • Accepted 13 February 2008
  • Published Online First 26 February 2008

Abstract

Background: We propose a set of criteria for diagnosis of intracranial infectious aneurysm (IA). The proposed diagnostic criteria contain a mandatory criterion (demonstration of intracranial aneurysm by neuroimaging) and 12 supportive criteria drawn from three domains. Domain A encompasses infection, such as infective endocarditis, meningitis, cavernous sinus thrombophlebitis or orbital cellulitis. Domain B encompasses angiographic features of the aneurysm, such as multiplicity, distal location, fusiform shape, change in size or appearance of new aneurysm at follow-up angiogram. Domain C encompasses other features, such as age <45 years, recent history of fever, lumbar puncture or cerebral haemorrhage. Each criterion is given 1 point and the sum under each domain (Asum, Bsum and Csum) and total score are calculated.

Methods: We evaluated these criteria in 25 patients with confirmed IA and in another 111 consecutive patients with non-infectious aneurysm. The sensitivity, specificity and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated for these cohorts.

Results: The highest ROC was for total score (0.997). A total score of 3 had high sensitivity (96%) and specificity (100%), as well as a positive predictive value of 100% and negative predictive value of 99.4%. A total score of 2 had high sensitivity (100%) but low specificity (87.4%). Other combinations had lower ROC areas, sensitivities and specificities.

Conclusion: Diagnosis of IA would be clinically compelling if three or more of the proposed supportive criteria are satisfied, or clinically probable if two proposed supportive criteria are satisfied apart from the mandatory criteria.

Footnotes

  • See Editorial Commentary, p 853

  • Competing interests: None.

This Article

  1. Abstract
  2. Full text
  3. PDF
  4. All versions of this article:
    1. jnnp.2007.131664v1
    2. 79/8/943 most recent

Responses

  1. Submit a response
  2. No responses published

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

BMJ Careers - Latest neurology and neurosurgery jobs