February 1964

Differential Diagnosis of Cerebrovascular Stroke

Author Affiliations


From the Department of Neurology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, and the Cincinnati General Hospital.

Arch Intern Med. 1964;113(2):195-199. doi:10.1001/archinte.1964.00280080031007

With the increasing number of cerebrovascular stroke cases and the important though controversial developments in their treatment, it seems timely to outline a method of prompt diagnosis. In 1935 Merritt and I 2 considered their differential diagnosis in this journal. Dealing since with many stroke patients, and sharing the experience with successive groups of medical students and house officers, has led naturally to some formulations. A cross section of our ongoing experience is presented, with the hope that a crisp summary may be useful for those not in the thick (one might say the thicket!) of vascular neurology. Detailed discussions on stroke are readily available.1,4,9,10

Although I am quite aware of the hazards of dismissing such conditions as subdural and spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage from the discussion—of the trouble they give in differential diagnosis—it is proposed to do no more than outline some points in differentiating them. Neither will I

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview