S

Sasha Gulati

Norwegian University of Science and Technology

ORCID: 0000-0003-3072-5697

Publishes on Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology, Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment, Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy. 161 papers and 3.8k citations.

161Publications
3.8kTotal Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.

Top publicationsby citations

Migraine and risk of stroke
Lise Rystad Øie, Tobias Kurth, Sasha Gulati et al.|Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry|2020
Cited by 217Open Access

Migraine and stroke are two common and heterogeneous neurovascular disorders responsible for a significant burden for those affected and a great economic cost for the society. There is growing evidence that migraine increases the overall risk of cerebrovascular diseases. In this review, based on available literature through a PubMed search, we found that ischaemic stroke in people with migraine is strongly associated with migraine with aura, young age, female sex, use of oral contraceptives and smoking habits. The risk of transient ischaemic attack also seems to be increased in people with migraine, although this issue has not been extensively investigated. Although migraine appears to be associated with haemorrhagic stroke, the migraine aura status has a small influence on this relationship. Neuroimaging studies have revealed a higher prevalence of asymptomatic structural brain lesions in people with migraine. They are also more likely to have unfavourable vascular risk factors; however, the increased risk of stroke seems to be more apparent among people with migraine without traditional risk factors. The mechanism behind the migraine-stroke association is unknown. In light of the higher risk of stroke in people with migraine with aura, it is important to identify and modify any vascular risk factor. There is currently no direct evidence to support that a migraine prophylactic treatment can reduce future stroke in people with migraine.

Minimally invasive decompression versus open laminectomy for central stenosis of the lumbar spine: pragmatic comparative effectiveness study
Cited by 175Open Access

OBJECTIVE: To test the equivalence for clinical effectiveness between microdecompression and laminectomy in patients with central lumbar spinal stenosis. DESIGN: Multicentre observational study. SETTING: Prospective data from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery. PARTICIPANTS: 885 patients with central stenosis of the lumbar spine who underwent surgery at 34 Norwegian orthopaedic or neurosurgical departments. Patients were treated from October 2006 to December 2011. INTERVENTIONS: Laminectomy and microdecompression. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was change in Oswestry disability index score one year after surgery. Secondary endpoints were quality of life (EuroQol EQ-5D), perioperative complications, and duration of surgical procedures and hospital stays. A blinded biostatistician performed predefined statistical analyses in unmatched and propensity matched cohorts. RESULTS: The study was powered to detect a difference between the groups of eight points on the Oswestry disability index at one year. 721 patients (81%) completed the one year follow-up. Equivalence between microdecompression and laminectomy was shown for the Oswestry disability index (difference 1.3 points, 95% confidence interval -1.36 to 3.92, P<0.001 for equivalence). Equivalence was confirmed in the propensity matched cohort and full information regression analyses. No difference was found between groups in quality of life (EQ-5D) one year after surgery. The number of patients with complications was higher in the laminectomy group (15.0% v 9.8%, P=0.018), but after propensity matching for complications the groups did not differ (P=0.23). The duration of surgery for single level decompression was shorter in the microdecompression group (difference 11.2 minutes, 95% confidence interval 4.9 to 17.5, P<0.001), but after propensity matching the groups did not differ (P=0.15). Patients in the microdecompression group had shorter hospital stays, both for single level decompression (difference 1.5 days, 95% confidence interval 1.7 to 2.6, P<0.001) and two level decompression (0.8 days, 1.0 to 2.2, P=0.003). CONCLUSION: At one year the effectiveness of microdecompression is equivalent to laminectomy in the surgical treatment of central stenosis of the lumbar spine. Favourable outcomes were observed at one year in both treatment groups.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02006901.

Effect of Spinal Cord Burst Stimulation vs Placebo Stimulation on Disability in Patients With Chronic Radicular Pain After Lumbar Spine Surgery
Cited by 114Open Access

Importance: The use of spinal cord stimulation for chronic pain after lumbar spine surgery is increasing, yet rigorous evidence of its efficacy is lacking. Objective: To investigate the efficacy of spinal cord burst stimulation, which involves the placement of an implantable pulse generator connected to electrodes with leads that travel into the epidural space posterior to the spinal cord dorsal columns, in patients with chronic radiculopathy after surgery for degenerative lumbar spine disorders. Design, Setting, and Participants: This placebo-controlled, crossover, randomized clinical trial in 50 patients was conducted at St Olavs University Hospital in Norway, with study enrollment from September 5, 2018, through April 28, 2021. The date of final follow-up was May 20, 2022. Interventions: Patients underwent two 3-month periods with spinal cord burst stimulation and two 3-month periods with placebo stimulation in a randomized order. Burst stimulation consisted of closely spaced, high-frequency electrical stimuli delivered to the spinal cord. The stimulus consisted of a 40-Hz burst mode of constant-current stimuli with 4 spikes per burst and an amplitude corresponding to 50% to 70% of the paresthesia perception threshold. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was difference in change from baseline in the self-reported Oswestry Disability Index (ODI; range, 0 points [no disability] to 100 points [maximum disability]; the minimal clinically important difference was 10 points) score between periods with burst stimulation and placebo stimulation. The secondary outcomes were leg and back pain, quality of life, physical activity levels, and adverse events. Results: Among 50 patients who were randomized (mean age, 52.2 [SD, 9.9] years; 27 [54%] were women), 47 (94%) had at least 1 follow-up ODI score and 42 (84%) completed all stimulation randomization periods and ODI measurements. The mean ODI score at baseline was 44.7 points and the mean changes in ODI score were -10.6 points for the burst stimulation periods and -9.3 points for the placebo stimulation periods, resulting in a mean between-group difference of -1.3 points (95% CI, -3.9 to 1.3 points; P = .32). None of the prespecified secondary outcomes showed a significant difference. Nine patients (18%) experienced adverse events, including 4 (8%) who required surgical revision of the implanted system. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with chronic radicular pain after lumbar spine surgery, spinal cord burst stimulation, compared with placebo stimulation, after placement of a spinal cord stimulator resulted in no significant difference in the change from baseline in self-reported back pain-related disability. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03546738.

Postoperative Deterioration in Health Related Quality of Life as Predictor for Survival in Patients with Glioblastoma: A Prospective Study
Cited by 86Open Access

BACKGROUND: Studies indicate that acquired deficits negatively affect patients' self-reported health related quality of life (HRQOL) and survival, but the impact of HRQOL deterioration after surgery on survival has not been explored. OBJECTIVE: Assess if change in HRQOL after surgery is a predictor for survival in patients with glioblastoma. METHODS: Sixty-one patients with glioblastoma were included. The majority of patients (n = 56, 91.8%) were operated using a neuronavigation system which utilizes 3D preoperative MRI and updated intraoperative 3D ultrasound volumes to guide resection. HRQOL was assessed using EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D), a generic instrument. HRQOL data were collected 1-3 days preoperatively and after 6 weeks. The mean change in EQ-5D index was -0.05 (95% CI -0.15-0.05) 6 weeks after surgery (p = 0.285). There were 30 patients (49.2%) reporting deterioration 6 weeks after surgery. In a Cox multivariate survival analysis we evaluated deterioration in HRQOL after surgery together with established risk factors (age, preoperative condition, radiotherapy, temozolomide and extent of resection). RESULTS: There were significant independent associations between survival and use of temozolomide (HR 0.30, p = 0.019), radiotherapy (HR 0.26, p = 0.030), and deterioration in HRQOL after surgery (HR 2.02, p = 0.045). Inclusion of surgically acquired deficits in the model did not alter the conclusion. CONCLUSION: Early deterioration in HRQOL after surgery is independently and markedly associated with impaired survival in patients with glioblastoma. Deterioration in patient reported HRQOL after surgery is a meaningful outcome in surgical neuro-oncology, as the measure reflects both the burden of symptoms and treatment hazards and is linked to overall survival.