Talk:Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis

message: I have expanded the article with some sources at my disposition, including the quick review in the BMJ 2007. However, I am trying to get my hands on two further sources that I think seriously deserve consideration:
* 
* 
* The entire November 2006 edition of the J Pak Med Assoc seems to be devoted to this condition...
** The entire content seems to be available free: http://www.jpma.org.pk/Issues_Articles/IssuesArticles.aspx?IssueID=66 JFW | T@lk 12:53, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And:  JFW | T@lk 14:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

text: And:  (FREE) JFW | T@lk 20:38, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion 

message: Just lost about 30 minutes work due to a caching problem typical of internet explorer. Have no time to continue further, but will do so tomorrow evening. JFW | T@lk 15:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Argh

message: Nominated for GA. Let's see. JFW | T@lk 18:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA nom 

message: I have temporarily removed the following:
:Other less well understood situations that increase the risk for cerebral sinus thrombosis are hyperthyroidism citing  and myelodysplastic syndrome.citing 
Both these states (hyperthyroidism and MDS) are only mentioned on the basis of case reports in a relatively low-impact factor publication. While I have not seen the fulltext, I don't think either of them demonstrate causality beyond "wow, our patient has two rare conditions, they must be related". JFW | T@lk 19:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Case reports

message: I have asked our radiology spy  for some neuroimaging. JFW | T@lk 21:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: More about CVST in kids:  (NEJM) and  (Brain).
Obstetric prognosis of CVST: does it come back? . JFW | T@lk 22:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kids 

message: It is indeed. Application has been successful, congratulations to all contributors. CycloneNimrod (talk) 11:53, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article?

message: It took a little while to find one so this is the best I can get for now! I hope it meets all standards? As always, I'm happy to help! Heather 11:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Cheers! See your talkpage. JFW | T@lk 06:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Success

message: I'm not sure but I'm pretty sure risk factors come under epidemiology but currently they are listed under signs and symptoms. I'll wait for a reply before I change it (or before anyone else should change it) but I think it makes more sense to be in epidemiology. Regards, CycloneNimrod talk?contribs? 16:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps a brief summary in the intro (e.g. postpartum) and then moving it? JFW | T@lk 12:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reordering per MEDMOS 

message: Much recent work in Europe has been done in The Netherlands by the Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis Study Group and more recently by the ISCVT. There are some highly relevant recent studies that are not cited in Stam (because the review predates these studies). , however, appeared in 2000 but is not discussed prominently by the reviewer - it discusses functional outcomes, surely worth mentioning in a neurological condition previously diagnosed mostly after death.... JFW | T@lk 13:26, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outcome 

message: Temporarily removed:
:Progressive speech disorders, decreased cognition and decreasing visual acuity have also been reported amongst cases of CVST. citing 
This was added to the section on raised intracranial pressure. Surely, these simply reflect symptoms we are already mentioning in people who are awake and talking. I will borrow someone's OHCM at work today and see in what context these symptoms are mentioned. JFW | T@lk 06:18, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reviewed OHCM 7th edition page 472. It is a very comprehensive entry: it lists a large number of associated causes including some that we are not listing (unsure what their source is!) and suggests that particular symptoms could be localising signs in CVST. It also lists cavernous sinus thrombosis amongst the other forms, even though this seems to be generally regarded as a separate condition. Other interesting points are: (1) it insists on T2-weighed gradient echo sequences to identify cortical vein thromboses, (2) it lists a number of predictors for death from a study published in Stroke on 7 July 2005 but I cannot find the relevant paper, (3) it is vague on the importance of anticoagulation. JFW | T@lk 18:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oxford Handbook 

message: The article's lede states that cerebral venous sinus thrombosis is a form of stroke, but perhaps it may be prudent to revise that statement to allow for cases of thrombosis that occur without persistent and clinically important neurologic sequelae. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's doctors have reported that she has been found to have experienced a transverse sinus thrombosis that was discovered on an MRI performed during "routine" follow-up a concussion sustained 2 1/2 weeks earlier. The doctors have said in their public statements that she did not have a stroke and has had no neurologic injury. Assuming their statement is correct, and that her diagnosis lies within the realm of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, this article as it is currently written does not appear to include cases of CVST that do not involve stroke or neurologic injury, such as Clinton's. I haven't carefully reviewed sources, but my sense is that the article could be revised to say that CVST is a rare form of thrombosis that may cause stroke, assuming sources can be found that state that.Dezastru (talk) 00:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that in the absence of focal neurology secondary to venous infarction it would not be appropriate to refer to this as a form of stroke (although it would fit in the larger category of cerebrovascular disease). JFW | T@lk 14:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "A rare form of stroke" 

message: doi:10.1111/jth.14210 JFW | T@lk 14:26, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Also: doi:10.7861/clinmedicine.18-1-75 JFW | T@lk 09:49, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  J Thromb Haemostat 

message: doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2017.04.020 is really quite a large case series, and the finding that 5.1% had cancer was interesting. Unfortunately the abstract is unclear as to whether this was due to local activity (i.e. thrombosis caused by a brain tumour or metastasis) or whether this was not related to the site of the tumour and more likely attributable to rheological factors.
The article has been cited 17 times on Scopus but I can't tell whether they cite this article specifically to demonstrate the association between cancer and CVST. JFW | T@lk 09:42, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cancer/malignancy 

message: Ref name AHAASA updated with 2014 new guideline --DrSorrowMD (talk) 11:44, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Ref update

message: research from Professor Paal Andre Holme of Norway’s Oslo University Hospital AND the same results found INDEPENDENTLY by the team of Professor Andreas Greinacher, Univ. Greifswald Germany.
A SCIENTIFIC paper will soon be out so be ready for that.
THis is just from REUTERS but RELIABLE.
If we in wiki want to be up to date, PLEASE can someone who knows the ins and outs of wiki better than me (I am not able to do this) PLEASE take this seriously. 
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-vaccine-idUSKBN2BC01M
The point is not whether the finding is 1 in Million, the point is wiki readers have the right to access new info and we must not hide it, but say clearly it is a rare event, AND confirm that the credentials of the researchers who did the work are first rate. So do take this finding seriously please and THANKS A LOT in advance to anyone taking up the challenge. Yes, it can cause worry, but TRANSPARENCY AND HONEST REPORTING OF NEW FACTS is the antidote to fear.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.123.203.106 (talk) 19:22, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I have refactored the title of this section because it was very long. JFW | T@lk 09:54, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update 

message: I just reverted, for the second time, the inclusion of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine in the Causes section. The additions were made by 47.220.171.134 and 141.126.102.7. Please don't add that claim again without a good source. Unless I'm mistaken, we're well away for proving a causal link. Firefangledfeathers (talk)  — Preceding undated comment added 16:41, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that we are still some way away from Bradford Hill level causation. JFW | T@lk 19:39, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: A sentence could be added under a new research section stating it's under investigation. A sentence could also be added to the treatment section about how heparin is contraindicated in these cases. Biosthmors (talk) 00:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  J&J Vaccine 

message: Removed pending discussion:
:Heparin should not, however, be used in cases of blood clots associated with the Johnson & Johnson coronavirus vaccine, or the Oxford–AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine as it may worsen the condition. 
Comments would be useful. I think this should not be the introduction as the absolute number of cases of VITT-CVT is still small. JFW | T@lk 12:59, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  VITT/heparin in introduction 

message: doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.035564 may be useful if it is felt that a subsection is now required. JFW | T@lk 13:30, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  AHA/ASA/CSL guideline for VITT-CVST