The neurointensive care management of patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is one of the most critical components contributing to short-term and long-term patient outcomes. Previous recommendations for the medical management of aSAH comprehensively summarized the evidence based on consensus conference held in 2011. In this report, we provide updated recommendations based on appraisal of the literature using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology.
The Population/Intervention/Comparator/Outcome (PICO) questions relevant to the medical management of aSAH were prioritized by consensus from the panel members. The panel used a custom-designed survey instrument to prioritize clinically relevant outcomes specific to each PICO question. To be included, the study design qualifying criteria were as follows: prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective or retrospective observational studies, case-control studies, case series with a sample larger than 20 patients, meta-analyses, restricted to human study participants. Panel members first screened titles and abstracts, and subsequently full text review of selected reports. Data were abstracted in duplicate from reports meeting inclusion criteria. Panelists used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Risk of Bias tool for assessment of RCTs and the \"Risk of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies - of Interventions\" tool for assessment of observational studies. The summary of the evidence for each PICO was presented to the full panel, and then the panel voted on the recommendations.
The initial search retrieved 15,107 unique publications, and 74 were included for data abstraction. Several RCTs were conducted to test pharmacological interventions, and we found that the quality of evidence for nonpharmacological questions was consistently poor. Five PICO questions were supported by strong recommendations, one PICO question was supported by conditional recommendations, and six PICO questions did not have sufficient evidence to provide a recommendation.
These guidelines provide recommendations for or against interventions proven to be effective, ineffective, or harmful in the medical management of patients with aSAH based on a rigorous review of the available literature. They also serve to highlight gaps in knowledge that should guide future research priorities. Despite improvements in the outcomes of patients with aSAH over time, many important clinical questions remain unanswered.

OBJECTIVE: International guidelines emphasise the importance of securing ruptured cerebral aneurysms within 48-72 h of ictus. We assessed the timing of treatment of patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH) referred to a national neurosurgical centre.
METHODS: Analysis of a prospective database of patients with aSAH admitted between 1st of February 2016 and 29th of February 2020 was performed. The timing to treatment was expressed in days and analysed in three ways: ictus to treatment, ictus to referral and referral to treatment. ORs with 95% CI were calculated for aneurysm treatment within 24, 48 and 72 h for good grade (WFSN 1-3) and poor grade (WFNS 4-5) cohorts separately.
RESULTS: Of a total of 538 patients with aSAH, the aneurysm was secured in 312 (58%) within 24 h and in 398 (74%) within 48 h of ictus. Securing the aneurysm within 48 h of ictus was achieved in 89% (395/444) of patients who were referred within 24 h of ictus, but in only 3.2% (3/94) who were referred > 24 h after ictus. Poor grade patients (WFNS 4-5) were more likely than good grade patients (WFNS 1-3) to be referred to neurosurgery within 48 h of ictus (OR 22.87, 95% CI 3.14-166.49, p = 0.0020) and for their aneurysm to be secured within 48 h (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.06-2.98, p = 0.0297) of ictus. Ictus to referral delay was highest in WFNS grade 1 patients.
CONCLUSIONS: In centres with 7 day per week provision of interventional neuroradiology and vascular neurosurgery, the majority of patients with aSAH can be treated within the timeframes recommended by international guidelines and this applies to all grades of aSAH. However, delays still occur in a significant proportion of patients and this particularly applies to delays in presentation and diagnosis in good grade patients.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this updated statement is to provide comprehensive and evidence-based recommendations for management of patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms.
METHODS: Writing group members used systematic literature reviews from January 1977 up to June 2014. They also reviewed contemporary published evidence-based guidelines, personal files, and published expert opinion to summarize existing evidence, indicate gaps in current knowledge, and when appropriate, formulated recommendations using standard American Heart Association criteria. The guideline underwent extensive peer review, including review by the Stroke Council Leadership and Stroke Scientific Statement Oversight Committees, before consideration and approval by the American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee.
RESULTS: Evidence-based guidelines are presented for the care of patients presenting with unruptured intracranial aneurysms. The guidelines address presentation, natural history, epidemiology, risk factors, screening, diagnosis, imaging and outcomes from surgical and endovascular treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To address the increasing need to counsel patients about treatment indications for unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIA), we endeavored to develop a consensus on assessment of UIAs among a group of specialists from diverse fields involved in research and treatment of UIAs.
METHODS: After composition of the research group, a Delphi consensus was initiated to identify and rate all features, which may be relevant to assess UIAs and their treatment by using ranking scales and analysis of inter-rater agreement (IRA) for each factor. IRA was categorized as very high, high, moderate, or low.
RESULTS: Ultimately, 39 specialists from 4 specialties agreed (high or very high IRAs) on the following key factors for or against UIA treatment decisions: (1) patient age, life expectancy, and comorbid diseases; (2) previous subarachnoid hemorrhage from a different aneurysm, family history for UIA or subarachnoid hemorrhage, nicotine use; (3) UIA size, location, and lobulation; (4) UIA growth or de novo formation on serial imaging; (5) clinical symptoms (cranial nerve deficit, mass effect, and thromboembolic events from UIAs); and (6) risk factors for UIA treatment (patient age and life expectancy, UIA size, and estimated risk of treatment). However, IRAs for features rated with low relevance were also generally low, which underlined the existing controversy about the natural history of UIAs.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight that neurovascular specialists currently consider many features as important when evaluating UIAs but also highlight that the appreciation of natural history of UIAs remains uncertain, even within a group of highly informed individuals.

OBJECTIVE: To update the Spanish Society of Neurology\'s guidelines for subarachnoid haemorrhage diagnosis and treatment.
METHODS: A review and analysis of the existing literature. Recommendations are given based on the level of evidence for each study reviewed.
RESULTS: The most common cause of spontaneous subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) is cerebral aneurysm rupture. Its estimated incidence in Spain is 9/100 000 inhabitants/year with a relative frequency of approximately 5% of all strokes. Hypertension and smoking are the main risk factors. Stroke patients require treatment in a specialised centre. Admission to a stroke unit should be considered for SAH patients whose initial clinical condition is good (Grades I or II on the Hunt and Hess scale). We recommend early exclusion of aneurysms from the circulation. The diagnostic study of choice for SAH is brain CT (computed tomography) without contrast. If the test is negative and SAH is still suspected, a lumbar puncture should then be performed. The diagnostic tests recommended in order to determine the source of the haemorrhage are MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) and angiography. Doppler ultrasonography studies are very useful for diagnosing and monitoring vasospasm. Nimodipine is recommended for preventing delayed cerebral ischaemia. Blood pressure treatment and neurovascular intervention may be considered in treating refractory vasospasm.
CONCLUSIONS: SAH is a severe and complex disease which must be managed in specialised centres by professionals with ample experience in relevant diagnostic and therapeutic processes.