You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 15, Issue 1
  • Internal carotid artery blister aneurysm rupture: a unifying diagnosis for massive epistaxis and unilateral embolic strokes

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Case report
Internal carotid artery blister aneurysm rupture: a unifying diagnosis for massive epistaxis and unilateral embolic strokes
  1. Mitchell Joseph Lycett,
  2. Sophie Dunkerton and
  3. Ferdinand Miteff
  1. John Hunter Hospital Department of Neurology, New Lambton Heights, New South Wales, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Dr Mitchell Joseph Lycett; mitchell.lycett{at}health.nsw.gov.au

Abstract

Concurrent epistaxis, embolic stroke and a ruptured internal carotid artery are rare but life-threatening delayed complications of cured nasopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. A timely diagnosis and effective management can be problematic. We report a case that highlights the unique diagnostic features of this presentation and contemporary endovascular treatment options available.

  • neurology
  • stroke
  • interventional radiology

https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2021-246866

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors The article was written in combination by MJL, SD and FM. MJL and FM were responsible for the creation of the included figure. SD was responsible for the included supplementary table. MJL is the guarantor.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Case reports provide a valuable learning resource for the scientific community and can indicate areas of interest for future research. They should not be used in isolation to guide treatment choices or public health policy.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.