⌘ KStart free
0%
Skip to lesson

Neurology

Stroke Syndromes

Localize cortical, deep, and brainstem strokes, explain crossed findings, recognize global hypoxic injury, and connect examination patterns to urgent care.

A patient suddenly cannot name a watch and has a weak right hand. Another has a hoarse voice, reduced pin sensation on the left face, and reduced pin sensation on the right body. Both may have ischemic stroke, but their examinations point to different tissue. Begin with the affected function, then the side and level, and only then the likely arterial supply.

A syndrome predicts a location; it does not prove a particular occluded artery or determine reperfusion eligibility. Vascular territories vary, lesions can be incomplete, and several structures share a blood supply. Confirm the working localization with urgent brain and vascular imaging.

The cortical map starts with body representation and language

The internal carotid circulation supplies the ACA and MCA systems and gives rise to the ophthalmic artery. The vertebral arteries join to form the basilar artery, which supplies pontine branches and usually terminates in the PCAs. Communicating arteries and anatomical variants alter collateral flow. A diagram of a territory is therefore a useful approximation, not a rigid border for every patient. [1] [2]

Medial hemisphere: ACA

Leg representation lies near the interhemispheric fissure. Medial frontal and supplementary motor regions contribute to initiation and behavior.

Lateral hemisphere: MCA

Face and arm representation, lateral language networks in the dominant hemisphere, and spatial attention networks are prominent.

Posterior and inferior hemisphere: PCA

Occipital visual cortex and inferior temporal structures are supplied here; deep branches reach thalamic and midbrain regions.

A surface-to-function map. The deep perforators need their own localization and are not represented as extra cortical areas. [3] [4] [5]

MCA cortical injury commonly affects the contralateral face and arm more than the leg. A dominant, usually left, superior-division infarct can produce nonfluent language with impaired expression and relatively preserved comprehension, a Broca-type pattern. Inferior-division injury can produce a Wernicke-type pattern: fluent but poorly meaningful speech with impaired comprehension and less obvious weakness. A large dominant MCA infarct may impair both expression and comprehension, producing global aphasia. Aphasia is a language disorder; dysarthria is impaired articulation. Test naming, comprehension, repetition, and fluency rather than deciding from speech volume alone. [1] [4]

Upper facial muscles receive substantial bilateral corticobulbar input, so a unilateral supranuclear lesion often weakens the opposite lower face with relative forehead sparing. A pontine facial nucleus or fascicle lesion can instead weaken the whole ipsilateral face. Neither pattern replaces examination of the other cranial and limb findings. [2]

A nondominant, usually right, cortical infarct can cause left hemispatial neglect and lack of awareness of a deficit, or anosognosia. Neglect concerns attention, not simply missing one half of the visual field. Test extinction and behavior as well as confrontation fields. A destructive frontal eye-field lesion often produces an acute gaze preference toward the injured hemisphere and away from the weak limbs. This cortical rule cannot be applied unchanged to a pontine gaze-center lesion. [1]

ACA injury often gives contralateral leg-predominant weakness or sensory loss. Medial frontal involvement can add abulia, impaired initiation, grasp responses, or urinary incontinence. Bilateral medial frontal injury can produce profound loss of spontaneous activity despite wakefulness. Distribution matters: isolated foot weakness also has peripheral causes, so accompanying upper motor neuron and cortical findings strengthen localization. [3] [1]

Visual fields point behind the chiasm, not automatically to one artery

A right homonymous field defect means the right half of visual space is lost in both eyes. It points to the left retrochiasmal pathway. Left occipital injury in the PCA territory is one cause, but optic tract, lateral geniculate, and optic radiation lesions can also do it. MCA infarction affecting optic radiations can combine aphasia, weakness, sensory loss, and hemianopia without requiring a second PCA infarct. [2] [5]

Macular sparing means central vision within the affected hemifield is preserved. It can accompany occipital infarction when the occipital pole remains viable, often through collateral perfusion. It is variable and must not be made a mandatory or standalone diagnostic sign. Fixation and formal field testing also affect interpretation. Imaging resolves the anatomical question more reliably than a slogan about macular supply. [6]

A dominant left occipital infarct extending into the splenium can cause alexia without agraphia: the patient can write but cannot read, including the text just written. Left visual cortex is injured, and visual information from the intact right hemisphere cannot readily reach the left language network through the damaged posterior callosal connection. Bilateral occipital injury can cause cortical blindness despite preserved pupillary reflex pathways; some patients deny the visual loss, a syndrome called Anton syndrome. [5] [2]

Thalamic injury can produce contralateral sensory loss and later central neuropathic pain. The VPL relays body somatosensation, while the VPM relays facial somatosensation. A lesion involving both can affect face and body. Do not attribute every hemisensory presentation specifically to the VPL alone. Proximal PCA or top-of-basilar disease may extend beyond isolated vision loss to bilateral thalamic or midbrain dysfunction with altered alertness and eye findings. [2] [5]

Brainstem syndromes become easier when each tract has its own crossing

A cranial nerve deficit on one side with a body deficit on the other suggests a brainstem lesion. The reason is not that every body tract has already crossed. Descending corticospinal fibers above the pyramidal decussation control the opposite body. Ascending spinothalamic fibers have already crossed in the spinal cord. Medial lemniscal fibers have crossed in the caudal medulla. Facial pain-temperature fibers in the spinal trigeminal tract and nucleus are still representing the ipsilateral face. [2]

Example: left lateral medulla. Left spinal trigeminal tract/nucleus injury gives left facial pain-temperature loss.

In the same lesion: left spinothalamic tract injury gives right body pain-temperature loss because those ascending fibers crossed lower down.

Nearby medullary functions: nucleus ambiguus injury impairs voice and swallowing; descending sympathetic disruption gives left Horner syndrome; inferior cerebellar peduncle injury gives left ataxia.

Usually outside the lateral lesion: the medial pyramid and medial lemniscus. Marked hemiparesis or vibration loss suggests extension or a different pattern.

Each line names the damaged structure before predicting the deficit. The face and body signs are crossed, but the lesion is on one side. [2] [7]

Lateral medullary, or Wallenberg, infarction is associated with vertebral or PICA disease. Vertigo, nystagmus, ipsilateral limb ataxia, crossed pain-temperature loss, Horner syndrome, hoarseness, and dysphagia may occur in varying combinations. Severe swallowing dysfunction is clinically important even when arm and leg strength are preserved. Nucleus ambiguus belongs to the medulla. [7] [2]

Lateral pontine AICA territory injury can combine ipsilateral lower motor neuron facial weakness, hearing or vestibular dysfunction, cerebellar findings, and crossed sensory abnormalities. Hearing loss is particularly informative because the inner-ear circulation commonly arises from the AICA system. AICA infarction is not simply every Wallenberg finding plus cranial nerves VII and VIII: medullary nucleus ambiguus injury should not be automatically assigned to a pontine lesion. PICA, AICA, and SCA cerebellar territories overlap clinically; ataxia alone seldom names the artery. [8] [1]

Medial medullary injury involves the pyramid, medial lemniscus, and sometimes hypoglossal fascicles. Expect contralateral weakness and impaired vibration/position sense with ipsilateral tongue weakness; the protruded tongue points toward the weak side. Supply includes anterior spinal and paramedian vertebral branches. In the ventromedial midbrain, ipsilateral third-nerve palsy with contralateral weakness suggests Weber syndrome, involving oculomotor fascicles and the cerebral peduncle. Paramedian PCA and basilar-region branches participate. [2] [7]

Bilateral ventral pontine injury can interrupt corticospinal and corticobulbar output while sparing awareness and vertical gaze. In classic locked-in syndrome, an apparently unresponsive patient may answer reliably through blinking or vertical gaze. Look for a communication channel before inferring absent awareness. Basilar occlusion can also cause coma when the arousal system is involved, so the vessel name alone does not specify consciousness. [1] [14]

Horizontal gaze: cortex, pons, and connecting fibers

A left pontine horizontal gaze-center lesion prevents gaze toward the left. A left medial longitudinal fasciculus (MLF) lesion instead impairs left-eye adduction during right gaze, often with right abducting nystagmus: left internuclear ophthalmoplegia. Combine a left PPRF or abducens nucleus lesion with left MLF injury and horizontal function is reduced to right-eye abduction, the one-and-a-half syndrome. An isolated abducens nerve lesion affects abduction of one eye rather than conjugate gaze of both. [2] [9]

Small deep infarcts can interrupt densely packed functions

Small-vessel disease related to hypertension and diabetes can affect deep penetrating arteries through lipohyalinosis or other arteriolar pathology. Lenticulostriate arteries supply important basal ganglia and capsular regions, but capsule supply is not exclusively MCA-derived. A small strategically located infarct can produce substantial weakness. Size is not a proxy for disability. [1] [2]

Pure motor

Contralateral weakness without clear cortical findings suggests interruption of motor pathways, often in the capsule or pons. Face, arm, and leg need not be equally affected.

Pure sensory or sensorimotor

Thalamic injury can produce hemisensory loss; combined thalamocapsular or capsular involvement can affect both sensation and strength. The capsule is not motor-only tissue.

Ataxic hemiparesis or dysarthria with a clumsy hand

These patterns can follow small pontine or capsular lesions. Ataxia accompanies weakness in the first; disproportionate articulation and hand dexterity problems characterize the second.

Absence of aphasia, neglect, or a cortical field pattern supports a deep localization but does not prove a lacunar mechanism. Emboli and larger-vessel disease can also cause small infarcts. MRI and etiologic investigation must test the working explanation. A patient with a pure motor syndrome can have a pontine infarct even without an accompanying cranial nerve deficit. [1]

Use localization to accelerate care, not postpone it

Establish last known well, check glucose, assess airway and swallowing, and obtain urgent brain imaging to distinguish ischemia from hemorrhage. Early CT can be unrevealing in ischemic stroke, especially small posterior fossa infarction. Persistent focal findings still require the stroke pathway. Sudden monocular painless visual loss with retinal ischemic findings is an ocular vascular emergency; it differs from a homonymous defect and requires urgent stroke-centered assessment. [10] [11]

The 2026 AHA/ASA ischemic stroke guidance includes alteplase or tenecteplase for eligible patients in the standard 4.5-hour window. A low NIHSS score does not make a disabling deficit harmless. Selected unknown-onset or later presentations may qualify through advanced imaging criteria. Thrombectomy eligibility depends on occlusion, imaging, timing, and clinical features; selected patients qualify up to 24 hours. The guideline specifically supports thrombectomy for appropriate basilar occlusion within 24 hours with NIHSS at least 10. These are assessment pathways, not automatic treatment for every syndrome. [10]

Headache, seizures, papilledema, or hemorrhagic lesions outside a single arterial territory can suggest cerebral venous thrombosis. Confirm with CT or MR venography. Anticoagulation is central to treatment in appropriate patients; venous hemorrhage is not managed by simply copying an arterial thrombolysis rule. Conversely, new blood within a previously documented arterial infarct supports hemorrhagic transformation. Atrial fibrillation alone does not establish that radiologic diagnosis. [12] [18]

A thunderclap headache can indicate subarachnoid hemorrhage even without hemiparesis. Obtain urgent noncontrast CT. Under the 2023 AHA/ASA pathway, presentation more than six hours after onset or a new neurologic deficit calls for lumbar puncture after a negative CT when safe. A selected patient without a new deficit who is scanned within six hours on a high-quality scanner with expert interpretation may follow the early-CT pathway. Neither pathway excludes every other vascular headache cause. [17]

Global oxygen or perfusion failure creates a different map

Cardiac arrest, profound hypotension, severe hypoxemia, or inadequate oxygen content can injure many brain regions without one occluded cerebral artery. Selectively vulnerable populations include hippocampal CA1 pyramidal neurons, cortical pyramidal neurons in layers III, V, and VI, cerebellar Purkinje cells, and basal ganglia neurons. CA1 injury can contribute to impaired new memory; cerebellar injury can contribute to ataxia. Do not turn this into an invariant ranking of which neuron always dies first. [13]

Watershed infarction describes injury at border zones between arterial territories, where perfusion pressure can be particularly vulnerable. Bilateral border-zone injury after systemic hypotension is different from selective neuronal injury within a tissue region, though both can coexist. Severe anemia lowers oxygen content even when pulse oximetry appears normal. Hypoglycemia is another energy-failure mechanism; its MRI distribution can include cortex, hippocampi, or white matter and should not be assumed identical to hypoxic-ischemic injury. [13] [15]

Coma lacks wakefulness; unresponsive wakefulness syndrome describes eye opening and sleep-wake cycling without behavioral evidence of awareness on appropriate assessment. Reproducible intentional responses support a different level of consciousness. Serial standardized examinations and exclusion of sedation, seizures, sensory deficits, and motor output limitations reduce misclassification. Locked-in syndrome is especially important because awareness can be intact despite profound paralysis. [14]

After cardiac arrest, do not predict a person's outcome from an estimated four-minute threshold, one examination, or one vulnerable brain region. AHA guidance supports delayed, multimodal prognostication that accounts for temperature management, sedation, and other confounders; consolidation is generally at least 72 hours after normothermia and sedative discontinuation. Explain what is known, what remains uncertain, and what serial evidence will resolve. [16]

Practice checking the side, level, and decision

Case 1

A 69-year-old suddenly develops right lower facial and arm weakness. Speech is effortful and sparse, but he follows simple commands and appears frustrated by difficulty naming objects. The leg is relatively spared. Which territory best fits?

Show answer and explanations for case 1
  1. A. Right MCA inferior division (Why this does not fit)

    A right nondominant lesion more often disrupts left spatial attention than language production.

  2. B. Left ACA cortical territory (Why this does not fit)

    ACA injury more often emphasizes the contralateral leg and medial frontal functions.

  3. C. Right PCA occipital territory (Why this does not fit)

    That location would primarily affect the left visual field and does not explain the right face-arm and language pattern.

  4. D. Left MCA superior division (Best answer)

    Dominant frontal language dysfunction with contralateral face-arm weakness fits this distribution.

Takeaway: Match nonfluent aphasia and face-arm weakness to dominant lateral frontal injury.

Case sources: [1] [4]

Case 2

A 74-year-old speaks fluently in long sentences after sudden symptom onset, but the content is poorly meaningful. She cannot follow spoken commands or repeat a sentence. Limb strength is nearly normal. Which localization is most likely?

Show answer and explanations for case 2
  1. A. Cerebellar hemisphere involved in speech articulation (Why this does not fit)

    Cerebellar dysarthria affects articulation rather than comprehension and meaningful language.

  2. B. Medial medullary pyramid containing descending motor fibers (Why this does not fit)

    A descending motor lesion would not cause this fluent language disorder.

  3. C. Dominant posterior temporal language cortex, inferior MCA division (Best answer)

    Fluent aphasia with poor comprehension can occur without major motor-cortex involvement.

  4. D. Nondominant medial frontal cortex, ACA territory (Why this does not fit)

    This does not explain the central language-comprehension deficit.

Takeaway: Fluency does not mean language is intact.

Case sources: [1] [4]

Case 3

A 70-year-old with acute left arm weakness eats only food on the right side of the tray and insists the weak arm belongs to someone else. Which hemisphere and function are most implicated?

Show answer and explanations for case 3
  1. A. Right cerebellar hemisphere coordinating limb movement (Why this does not fit)

    Cerebellar ataxia does not account for the attentional and awareness abnormalities.

  2. B. Right hemisphere spatial-attention networks (Best answer)

    Left neglect and impaired awareness of the deficit commonly accompany nondominant cortical injury.

  3. C. Left hemisphere primary auditory cortex (Why this does not fit)

    The stem concerns spatial attention and body awareness, not hearing.

  4. D. Left medial frontal cortex representing the leg (Why this does not fit)

    That area does not explain left-sided weakness and neglect.

Takeaway: Neglect is an attentional disorder that can coexist with weakness or a field defect.

Case sources: [1] [4]

Case 4

A patient develops global aphasia, right face-arm weakness, right sensory loss, and a right homonymous hemianopia. CTA shows a left proximal MCA occlusion. Must a second PCA occlusion be present to explain the field defect?

Show answer and explanations for case 4
  1. A. No; left MCA injury can include optic radiations along with language and sensorimotor tissue (Best answer)

    One large MCA infarct can account for the complete pattern.

  2. B. Yes; the MCA never supplies any retrochiasmal visual pathway (Why this does not fit)

    Optic radiations can be affected within MCA territory.

  3. C. Yes; aphasia with a field cut always requires separate anterior and posterior circulation infarcts (Why this does not fit)

    A dominant proximal MCA lesion can involve both language networks and optic radiations. The combination does not require a second PCA occlusion.

  4. D. No; the field defect must be monocular retinal disease (Why this does not fit)

    A homonymous defect involves corresponding visual-space halves in both eyes, not one retina.

Takeaway: A homonymous defect is not synonymous with PCA occlusion.

Case sources: [1] [2] [4]

Case 5

A patient with an acute destructive left frontal eye-field infarct has right hemiparesis. Which initial gaze preference is most expected?

Show answer and explanations for case 5
  1. A. Toward the right (Why this does not fit)

    This reverses the usual acute destructive cortical pattern.

  2. B. No horizontal preference because the cortex does not control conjugate gaze (Why this does not fit)

    The frontal eye fields influence contralateral horizontal gaze. A destructive left lesion can produce leftward preference.

  3. C. Toward the weak side because cortical and pontine gaze lesions act identically (Why this does not fit)

    Cortical and pontine gaze circuitry have different roles. Destructive left frontal eye-field injury tends to favor gaze toward the lesion, away from the weak right limbs.

  4. D. Toward the left (Best answer)

    Loss of left frontal drive toward the right often leaves a preference toward the injured hemisphere.

Takeaway: For an acute destructive cortical lesion, gaze often favors the lesion side.

Case sources: [1] [2]

Case 6

A 63-year-old suddenly develops marked right leg weakness and cortical sensory loss, with only mild right hand weakness. MRI shows an infarct of the left medial frontal-parietal surface. Which artery is most implicated?

Show answer and explanations for case 6
  1. A. Right anterior cerebral artery (Why this does not fit)

    A right cortical lesion would predominantly affect the left leg.

  2. B. Right posterior inferior cerebellar artery (Why this does not fit)

    A cerebellar-medullary territory does not explain a left medial cortical infarct.

  3. C. Left anterior cerebral artery (Best answer)

    The medial lower-limb representation corresponds to ACA territory.

  4. D. Left MCA inferior division (Why this does not fit)

    That territory emphasizes lateral temporal-parietal functions rather than the medial leg area.

Takeaway: Leg-predominant cortical deficits direct attention to the medial hemisphere.

Case sources: [3]

Case 7

Following bilateral medial frontal infarcts, a patient is awake but rarely initiates speech or activity. He can briefly respond when repeatedly prompted and has bilateral leg weakness and urinary incontinence. Which syndrome best fits?

Show answer and explanations for case 7
  1. A. Unilateral pure sensory thalamic stroke (Why this does not fit)

    That would not explain bilateral leg weakness and profound loss of spontaneous behavior.

  2. B. Severe abulia from bilateral ACA-region injury (Best answer)

    Loss of initiation can coexist with wakefulness when medial frontal circuits are damaged.

  3. C. Classic locked-in syndrome from isolated ventral pontine injury (Why this does not fit)

    Locked-in patients have preserved intention but profound motor output failure; the demonstrated medial frontal lesions explain impaired initiation.

  4. D. Wernicke aphasia from isolated left temporal injury (Why this does not fit)

    Fluent incomprehensible speech is not the dominant problem described.

Takeaway: Wakefulness, intention, and motor output are separate functions.

Case sources: [1] [3] [14]

Case 8

A patient repeatedly misses objects in the right half of visual space with either eye open. MRI shows an isolated acute occipital cortical infarct. Which side is injured?

Show answer and explanations for case 8
  1. A. Left occipital cortex (Best answer)

    Each occipital cortex represents the opposite visual hemifield.

  2. B. Right occipital cortex (Why this does not fit)

    A right occipital lesion would affect the left visual hemifield.

  3. C. Right retina (Why this does not fit)

    A retinal lesion produces monocular rather than homonymous loss.

  4. D. Left optic nerve (Why this does not fit)

    An optic nerve lesion would affect vision from one eye rather than the right field in both.

Takeaway: Name the missing visual field and then choose the opposite retrochiasmal side.

Case sources: [2] [5]

Case 9

A left occipital infarct causes right homonymous hemianopia, but formal testing shows a small area of preserved central vision in the affected hemifield. What is the most appropriate explanation?

Show answer and explanations for case 9
  1. A. Every PCA infarct must spare the macula through an identical arterial border (Why this does not fit)

    The infarct extent and collateral anatomy are variable.

  2. B. The result excludes any occipital lesion (Why this does not fit)

    Macular sparing is compatible with occipital infarction.

  3. C. Preservation of the entire occipital cortex, with the deficit arising in the optic tract (Why this does not fit)

    The imaging and field pattern place the injury in occipital cortex. Central sparing can reflect surviving cortical macular representation rather than a different lesion site.

  4. D. Survival of the cortical macular representation, often supported by collateral perfusion (Best answer)

    Preserved occipital-pole tissue can explain macular sparing, which varies across patients.

Takeaway: Macular sparing describes preserved function, not a compulsory feature of PCA stroke.

Case sources: [6]

Case 10

A right-handed patient can write a coherent sentence but cannot read it afterward. Spoken comprehension is preserved, and a right homonymous hemianopia is present. Which lesion best explains the combination?

Show answer and explanations for case 10
  1. A. Left cerebellar hemisphere (Why this does not fit)

    Cerebellar injury does not explain alexia with a homonymous field defect.

  2. B. Right optic nerve alone (Why this does not fit)

    Monocular input loss would not disconnect reading while preserving writing in this manner.

  3. C. Left occipital cortex with splenial involvement (Best answer)

    The lesion interrupts left visual processing and posterior callosal transfer from the intact right visual cortex to dominant language networks.

  4. D. Right frontal eye field alone (Why this does not fit)

    That can affect gaze but does not explain this reading-writing dissociation.

Takeaway: Alexia without agraphia can reveal visual-language disconnection.

Case sources: [2] [5]

Case 11

A 77-year-old has a left homonymous hemianopia after a small isolated right occipital infarct. Strength, sensation, and language remain intact. Which interpretation is best?

Show answer and explanations for case 11
  1. A. The findings require bilateral retinal ischemia (Why this does not fit)

    The homonymous pattern and cortical MRI finding support a retrochiasmal lesion.

  2. B. An isolated right PCA cortical syndrome fits (Best answer)

    Not every PCA infarct extends to thalamic, capsular, or midbrain structures.

  3. C. Preserved limb strength rules out a stroke (Why this does not fit)

    Occipital infarction may impair vision without motor loss.

  4. D. The field loss establishes a left PCA lesion (Why this does not fit)

    The missing left visual field maps to the right retrochiasmal pathway.

Takeaway: A focal stroke can affect one function while sparing the rest of the examination.

Case sources: [5]

Case 12

After bilateral occipital infarcts, a patient cannot identify objects visually but insists she sees normally and invents descriptions. Pupillary light responses are preserved. Which explanation best fits?

Show answer and explanations for case 12
  1. A. Cortical blindness with denial of visual loss, or Anton syndrome (Best answer)

    Occipital injury can abolish conscious vision while sparing the subcortical pupil reflex pathway.

  2. B. Bilateral complete optic nerve transection (Why this does not fit)

    That would disrupt afferent pupillary responses and is not the demonstrated cortical lesion.

  3. C. Left lateral medullary infarction alone (Why this does not fit)

    This would not explain bilateral cortical visual loss.

  4. D. Pure expressive aphasia (Why this does not fit)

    The issue is visual awareness and recognition, not simply language production.

Takeaway: Preserved pupil responses do not establish preserved conscious vision.

Case sources: [2] [5]

Case 13

Six weeks after a right thalamic infarct, a patient with residual left hemisensory loss develops burning left-sided pain from light touch. Which mechanism is most likely?

Show answer and explanations for case 13
  1. A. New peripheral small-fiber neuropathy (Why this does not fit)

    Peripheral neuropathy can cause burning pain, but the hemisensory distribution after a contralateral thalamic injury favors central poststroke pain.

  2. B. Painful spasticity (Why this does not fit)

    Spasticity can cause pain, but this stem emphasizes sensory loss and pain from light touch rather than increased tone or spasms.

  3. C. Complex regional pain syndrome (Why this does not fit)

    This can occur after stroke, but regional autonomic or trophic findings are not supplied. Hemibody sensory changes after thalamic injury favor central neuropathic pain.

  4. D. Central poststroke neuropathic pain (Best answer)

    A prior sensory pathway lesion can produce delayed pain and allodynia on the contralateral side.

Takeaway: Sensory pathway injury can later produce abnormal pain, not only numbness.

Case sources: [1] [2]

Case 14

MRI shows a small left thalamic infarct involving both VPL and VPM regions. Which sensory distribution is most consistent?

Show answer and explanations for case 14
  1. A. Right body loss with facial sensation necessarily preserved (Why this does not fit)

    VPM involvement makes facial sensory loss plausible.

  2. B. Crossed facial and body pain-temperature loss (Why this does not fit)

    Crossed face-body findings suggest some brainstem lesions. Left VPM and VPL injury can affect right facial and body sensation respectively.

  3. C. Right body and right facial sensory loss (Best answer)

    VPL relays body sensation and VPM facial sensation, predominantly from the opposite side.

  4. D. Left body and left facial sensory loss (Why this does not fit)

    This reverses the expected thalamic laterality.

Takeaway: Keep VPL body and VPM face distinct.

Case sources: [2]

Case 15

A patient with longstanding hypertension develops right face, arm, and leg weakness without aphasia, neglect, or visual field loss. MRI shows a small left posterior internal capsule infarct. Which syndrome fits?

Show answer and explanations for case 15
  1. A. Pure sensory thalamic syndrome (Why this does not fit)

    The defining finding here is weakness, not isolated sensory loss.

  2. B. Pure motor lacunar syndrome (Best answer)

    The demonstrated capsular motor pathway lesion explains contralateral weakness without cortical dysfunction.

  3. C. Left MCA cortical inferior-division syndrome (Why this does not fit)

    Aphasia or other lateral cortical findings would be expected from that location rather than the imaged capsule.

  4. D. Right lateral medullary syndrome (Why this does not fit)

    Crossed cranial sensory and bulbar findings are absent, and the image localizes elsewhere.

Takeaway: The examination suggests a deep motor pattern; imaging specifies the site.

Case sources: [1] [2]

Case 16

A small left thalamocapsular infarct causes right weakness and right sensory loss without aphasia. Which interpretation is best?

Show answer and explanations for case 16
  1. A. A deep sensorimotor syndrome (Best answer)

    Nearby sensory and motor pathways can both be affected by a deep infarct.

  2. B. Impossible, because the internal capsule contains only motor fibers (Why this does not fit)

    The capsule carries ascending as well as descending connections.

  3. C. Proof of two separate cortical arterial occlusions (Why this does not fit)

    A single deep lesion can explain both deficits.

  4. D. An isolated right occipital syndrome (Why this does not fit)

    That would produce a visual field deficit rather than this motor-sensory pattern.

Takeaway: Deep does not mean motor-only.

Case sources: [1] [2]

Case 17

A patient has left leg weakness with disproportionate left limb incoordination. There is no aphasia or neglect, and MRI demonstrates a small right pontine infarct. Which clinical pattern is most appropriate?

Show answer and explanations for case 17
  1. A. Pure sensory stroke (Why this does not fit)

    The prominent weakness and incoordination make that label incomplete.

  2. B. Wernicke aphasia (Why this does not fit)

    Language comprehension is not the impaired function.

  3. C. Isolated left peripheral vestibular neuritis (Why this does not fit)

    That would not explain left hemiparesis with a demonstrated right pontine infarct.

  4. D. Ataxic hemiparesis (Best answer)

    Weakness and ataxia on the same body side can result from a small pontine lesion affecting motor and cerebellar-related pathways.

Takeaway: Ataxia can accompany a deep motor syndrome.

Case sources: [1]

Case 18

A 65-year-old develops prominent dysarthria and difficulty writing with the right hand, with mild right lower facial weakness. Language comprehension is normal. MRI shows a small left pontine infarct. Which label best fits?

Show answer and explanations for case 18
  1. A. Pure sensory thalamic syndrome (Why this does not fit)

    The stem does not describe isolated hemisensory loss.

  2. B. Right ACA cortical infarction (Why this does not fit)

    The imaging and hand-focused symptoms do not match that territory.

  3. C. Dysarthria-clumsy hand syndrome (Best answer)

    Articulation and hand dexterity are disproportionately affected by the small pontine lesion.

  4. D. Global aphasia (Why this does not fit)

    The patient understands language, and the problem is articulation rather than global language failure.

Takeaway: Separate impaired articulation from impaired language.

Case sources: [1] [2]

Case 19

An acute pure motor syndrome affects the left arm and leg. There are no cranial nerve findings. MRI reveals a small right ventral pontine infarct. Which conclusion is most accurate?

Show answer and explanations for case 19
  1. A. A cortical lesion is required whenever the face is spared (Why this does not fit)

    A pontine motor pathway lesion can spare facial function.

  2. B. Pontine pure motor stroke can spare cranial nerve function (Best answer)

    A small lesion can selectively affect corticospinal fibers while sparing nearby nuclei and fascicles.

  3. C. The MRI must be wrong because all brainstem strokes are crossed syndromes (Why this does not fit)

    Crossed findings are helpful when present, not mandatory in every brainstem infarct.

  4. D. Pure motor stroke always requires exactly equal face, arm, and leg weakness (Why this does not fit)

    Distribution varies with lesion size and fiber involvement.

Takeaway: Do not turn a useful brainstem pattern into an absolute rule.

Case sources: [1] [2]

Case 20

A patient suddenly develops hoarseness, left limb ataxia, left facial pain-temperature loss, and right body pain-temperature loss. Left ptosis and miosis are present, with preserved limb strength. Where is the lesion?

Show answer and explanations for case 20
  1. A. Left lateral medulla (Best answer)

    The ipsilateral cranial/autonomic/cerebellar findings and contralateral spinothalamic loss fit Wallenberg syndrome.

  2. B. Right lateral medulla (Why this does not fit)

    That would reverse the face-body and Horner laterality.

  3. C. Left medial medulla (Why this does not fit)

    A medial lesion more often involves tongue weakness, motor pathways, and vibration-position sensation.

  4. D. Right motor cortex (Why this does not fit)

    A cortical lesion does not explain crossed face-body sensory loss with hoarseness.

Takeaway: Localize the lesion to the side of the cranial and Horner findings.

Case sources: [2] [7]

Case 21

A left lateral medullary infarct reduces pin sensation on the left face and right body. Why are the sensory deficits on opposite sides?

Show answer and explanations for case 21
  1. A. Facial and body pain-temperature pathways both cross in the medulla (Why this does not fit)

    Body spinothalamic fibers have already crossed in the spinal cord. Lateral medullary injury can affect ipsilateral facial input and contralateral body input.

  2. B. The medullary sensory decussation carries both facial and body pain-temperature input (Why this does not fit)

    The medial lemniscal decussation carries dorsal-column modalities from the body. This pain-temperature pattern instead reflects spinal trigeminal and spinothalamic anatomy.

  3. C. The sensory pattern requires separate peripheral lesions on the two sides (Why this does not fit)

    A single lateral medullary lesion accounts for the pattern because face and body pathways are affected at different stages relative to their crossings.

  4. D. Facial pain-temperature fibers have not crossed in the brainstem; spinothalamic fibers crossed in the cord (Best answer)

    The two systems represent different sides at this medullary level.

Takeaway: Track the crossing of each sensory system separately.

Case sources: [2]

Case 22

A patient with lateral medullary infarction has a wet voice and coughs after a sip of water, although arm and leg strength are normal. Which action is most appropriate?

Show answer and explanations for case 22
  1. A. Attribute the voice change to a cortical language deficit (Why this does not fit)

    Hoarseness and impaired swallowing reflect bulbar function, not aphasia.

  2. B. Assume nucleus ambiguus function is intact because the lesion is lateral (Why this does not fit)

    The nucleus ambiguus is a key structure at risk in the lateral medulla.

  3. C. Hold oral intake for swallow assessment; address airway protection (Best answer)

    Medullary bulbar dysfunction can create aspiration risk independently of limb strength.

  4. D. Permit unrestricted oral intake because motor strength is normal (Why this does not fit)

    Limb testing does not assess pharyngeal or laryngeal function.

Takeaway: Preserved limb strength does not mean safe swallowing.

Case sources: [2] [7] [10]

Case 23

A patient develops right upper and lower facial weakness, sudden right hearing loss, vertigo, and right limb ataxia. MRI localizes acute injury to the right lateral caudal pons and nearby cerebellar region. Which vascular territory best fits?

Show answer and explanations for case 23
  1. A. Right anterior spinal medullary territory (Why this does not fit)

    A medial medullary lesion emphasizes tongue, motor, and medial lemniscal findings rather than VII and auditory structures.

  2. B. Right AICA territory (Best answer)

    The lateral pontine facial and auditory-vestibular combination supports this distribution.

  3. C. Right ACA territory (Why this does not fit)

    The ACA supplies medial cerebral regions, not the lateral caudal pons.

  4. D. Left PCA occipital territory (Why this does not fit)

    That would more naturally cause a right visual field deficit, not this right pontine syndrome.

Takeaway: Facial weakness with auditory-vestibular dysfunction helps identify lateral pontine injury.

Case sources: [8] [2]

Case 24

A patient with imaging-confirmed AICA infarction has ipsilateral facial weakness and hearing loss. A trainee says that nucleus ambiguus destruction is required because AICA causes every Wallenberg feature plus VII and VIII findings. Which correction is best?

Show answer and explanations for case 24
  1. A. Isolated pontine AICA injury need not involve the medullary nucleus ambiguus (Best answer)

    Pontine and medullary syndromes share some pathways but not every cranial nucleus.

  2. B. Dysphagia in any AICA infarct establishes direct nucleus ambiguus destruction (Why this does not fit)

    Nucleus ambiguus is medullary. Swallowing impairment requires assessment but does not prove this nucleus is included in an isolated pontine infarct.

  3. C. Facial weakness and hearing loss together localize an isolated lesion to the medulla (Why this does not fit)

    This pair supports lateral caudal pontine or associated auditory-system involvement. It is not the defining pair for an isolated lateral medullary lesion.

  4. D. PICA and AICA syndromes can be distinguished solely by ataxia (Why this does not fit)

    Both territories can cause ataxia. Associated cranial nerve findings and imaging provide more useful localization.

Takeaway: Compare shared tracts without relocating cranial nuclei.

Case sources: [2] [8]

Case 25

A patient has acute left hemiparesis, impaired left vibration and joint-position sense, and a tongue that deviates right on protrusion. MRI confirms a right medial medullary infarct. Which structures explain the pattern?

Show answer and explanations for case 25
  1. A. Right spinal trigeminal tract and nucleus ambiguus only (Why this does not fit)

    Those explain facial pain-temperature and bulbar findings in lateral medullary disease, not this medial triad.

  2. B. Left motor cortex and left optic radiations (Why this does not fit)

    That would not explain right lower motor neuron tongue weakness with the demonstrated medullary lesion.

  3. C. Right facial nucleus and cochlear nuclei (Why this does not fit)

    These are pontine-region structures associated with facial and hearing findings, absent here.

  4. D. Right pyramid, medial lemniscus, and hypoglossal fascicles (Best answer)

    At this level motor and medial lemniscal injury affects the opposite body, while hypoglossal injury weakens the same-sided tongue.

Takeaway: The tongue identifies the medullary lesion side in the medial syndrome.

Case sources: [2] [7]

Case 26

A patient develops left ptosis with a down-and-out left eye and right arm and leg weakness. MRI shows a left ventromedial midbrain infarct. Which paired structures are involved?

Show answer and explanations for case 26
  1. A. Right MLF and right facial nucleus (Why this does not fit)

    This would not match the left third-nerve findings or ventromedial midbrain image.

  2. B. Left optic cortex and splenium (Why this does not fit)

    Those structures can cause visual and reading deficits, not this crossed motor syndrome.

  3. C. Left oculomotor fascicles and cerebral peduncle (Best answer)

    Ipsilateral third-nerve dysfunction with contralateral corticospinal weakness fits Weber syndrome.

  4. D. Left hypoglossal fascicles and medullary pyramid (Why this does not fit)

    That would produce tongue weakness rather than a third-nerve palsy.

Takeaway: Pair a cranial nerve level with the adjacent long tract.

Case sources: [2]

Case 27

After basilar artery occlusion, a patient is quadriplegic and unable to speak. She consistently answers yes/no questions through vertical gaze. Which syndrome is most likely?

Show answer and explanations for case 27
  1. A. Global aphasia alone (Why this does not fit)

    Aphasia alone does not explain quadriplegia with preserved comprehension demonstrated through eye responses.

  2. B. Classic locked-in syndrome (Best answer)

    Preserved awareness and intentional eye communication with severe motor output failure fit bilateral ventral pontine injury.

  3. C. Coma (Why this does not fit)

    Reliable intentional responses demonstrate awareness inconsistent with coma.

  4. D. Unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (Why this does not fit)

    Reproducible command-following through gaze is evidence of awareness.

Takeaway: Test a spared output channel before concluding that awareness is absent.

Case sources: [1] [14]

Case 28

An apparently unresponsive patient with extensive pontine ischemia cannot speak or use the limbs. Which examination step is particularly important before assigning a disorder of consciousness?

Show answer and explanations for case 28
  1. A. Test reliable responses to commands via vertical gaze or blinking (Best answer)

    A preserved eye-based response may reveal awareness despite severe paralysis.

  2. B. Assume absence of limb withdrawal proves absent awareness (Why this does not fit)

    Motor output failure can mask awareness.

  3. C. Classify awareness from spontaneous eye opening alone (Why this does not fit)

    Eye opening establishes arousal, not awareness. Reliable command-following through a preserved channel is important in severe motor impairment.

  4. D. Use only spoken commands requiring a hand squeeze (Why this does not fit)

    A paralyzed patient cannot demonstrate awareness through a hand response. A preserved response channel such as gaze or blinking helps avoid misclassification.

Takeaway: Behavioral testing must account for the motor and sensory pathways still available.

Case sources: [14]

Case 29

MRI shows an acute lesion of the left pontine horizontal gaze circuitry involving the abducens nucleus. Which deficit is expected?

Show answer and explanations for case 29
  1. A. Isolated failure of the right eye to abduct (Why this does not fit)

    That would implicate the right abducens motor pathway, not the left gaze nucleus.

  2. B. A mandatory leftward gaze preference identical to a destructive left frontal eye-field lesion (Why this does not fit)

    Pontine gaze circuitry and cortical gaze drive have different lesion effects.

  3. C. Isolated loss of the right visual field (Why this does not fit)

    A visual field deficit is distinct from impaired ocular motor commands.

  4. D. Impaired conjugate gaze toward the left (Best answer)

    The left abducens nucleus coordinates left lateral rectus and right medial rectus activation for leftward gaze.

Takeaway: A gaze nucleus lesion affects coordinated gaze toward its own side.

Case sources: [2]

Case 30

During right gaze, the left eye fails to adduct while the right eye abducts with nystagmus. Left gaze is otherwise intact. MRI shows a small brainstem infarct. Which tract is most likely affected?

Show answer and explanations for case 30
  1. A. Left abducens nerve (Why this does not fit)

    That would impair left-eye abduction, not the adduction described.

  2. B. Right optic tract (Why this does not fit)

    A sensory visual pathway lesion would cause a field defect rather than this ocular motor pattern.

  3. C. Left medial longitudinal fasciculus (Best answer)

    The left MLF carries the internuclear signal needed for left medial rectus activation during right gaze.

  4. D. Right medial longitudinal fasciculus (Why this does not fit)

    That would impair right-eye adduction during left gaze.

Takeaway: Name INO for the eye with impaired adduction and the same-sided MLF.

Case sources: [2] [9]

Case 31

A patient cannot look left with either eye. On attempted right gaze, only the right eye abducts; the left eye still cannot adduct. Which lesion best explains the entire pattern?

Show answer and explanations for case 31
  1. A. Bilateral occipital infarction (Why this does not fit)

    Visual cortical damage does not directly generate this patterned horizontal motor deficit.

  2. B. Left PPRF or abducens nucleus together with the left MLF (Best answer)

    The left gaze palsy plus left INO forms a left one-and-a-half syndrome.

  3. C. Isolated left abducens nerve injury (Why this does not fit)

    This would not prevent right-eye adduction during left gaze or left-eye adduction during right gaze.

  4. D. Isolated right frontal eye-field injury (Why this does not fit)

    That does not explain the specific combined gaze-palsy and internuclear pattern.

Takeaway: One-and-a-half syndrome combines ipsilateral gaze-center and MLF injury.

Case sources: [9]

Case 32

A patient develops acute right limb dysmetria and gait ataxia. MRI shows a right superior cerebellar infarct, and vascular imaging identifies an occlusion of the right SCA. Which statement is best?

Show answer and explanations for case 32
  1. A. Imaging identifies the SCA territory; ataxia alone does not (Best answer)

    Cerebellar signs overlap across posterior circulation territories.

  2. B. Any right-sided ataxia proves right AICA occlusion (Why this does not fit)

    Ataxia is not specific to one cerebellar artery.

  3. C. The right cerebellar lesion should cause only left limb ataxia (Why this does not fit)

    Cerebellar hemisphere lesions commonly produce ipsilateral limb coordination deficits.

  4. D. Preserved strength makes cerebellar infarction impossible (Why this does not fit)

    Coordination can be impaired without major weakness.

Takeaway: Use cerebellar signs to localize function and imaging to refine vascular attribution.

Case sources: [1] [2]

Case 33

A 71-year-old develops continuous vertigo, severe inability to stand, and new unilateral hearing loss. Initial noncontrast CT is normal. What is the best next approach?

Show answer and explanations for case 33
  1. A. Exclude stroke because CT is normal (Why this does not fit)

    Small posterior fossa infarcts may not be visible on early CT.

  2. B. Diagnose benign positional vertigo without assessing the continuous symptoms (Why this does not fit)

    Brief position-triggered attacks differ from this continuous disabling syndrome.

  3. C. Assign a specific artery solely from vertigo without imaging (Why this does not fit)

    Vestibular symptoms overlap across disorders and cannot uniquely specify a vessel.

  4. D. Urgently assess posterior circulation ischemia with expert examination and further imaging (Best answer)

    Severe new gait dysfunction and hearing loss can accompany AICA-region ischemia; normal early CT does not settle the diagnosis.

Takeaway: Posterior circulation warning findings need assessment despite a normal early CT.

Case sources: [8] [10]

Case 34

A 68-year-old has sudden painless loss of vision in the left eye. Examination shows a left relative afferent pupillary defect, retinal whitening, and a cherry-red fovea. What is the best response?

Show answer and explanations for case 34
  1. A. Provide reassurance based on the normal vision in the other eye (Why this does not fit)

    Retinal arterial occlusion remains urgent despite normal fellow-eye vision.

  2. B. Diagnose migraine aura based on the loss of vision alone (Why this does not fit)

    The persistent monocular loss and objective retinal ischemia require a different pathway.

  3. C. Urgent stroke-centered assessment for central retinal artery occlusion (Best answer)

    The monocular ischemic retinal pattern is an acute vascular emergency.

  4. D. Arrange routine follow-up for an isolated right PCA infarction (Why this does not fit)

    A right PCA infarct produces a left homonymous field defect, not this unilateral retinal examination.

Takeaway: Retinal ischemia and occipital ischemia produce different visual patterns, but both can be emergencies.

Case sources: [11] [5]

Case 35

A patient arrives two hours after sudden disabling aphasia. CT excludes hemorrhage, glucose is normal, and the stroke team finds no contraindication to IV thrombolysis. Which statement matches 2026 AHA/ASA guidance?

Show answer and explanations for case 35
  1. A. The patient must wait for infarction to become obvious on CT (Why this does not fit)

    Waiting for visible established injury can unnecessarily delay reperfusion.

  2. B. Eligible patients in the standard window may receive alteplase or tenecteplase (Best answer)

    The updated guidance recognizes both thrombolytic options; disabling aphasia warrants serious assessment even with a modest NIHSS.

  3. C. Only alteplase is recognized and tenecteplase is never an option (Why this does not fit)

    That no longer reflects the 2026 guidance.

  4. D. A low NIHSS score rules out thrombolysis even when the aphasia is disabling (Why this does not fit)

    Disability matters, not the score alone.

Takeaway: Apply current eligibility criteria to the disabling deficit, not only the numerical score.

Case sources: [10]

Case 36

A patient awakens with disabling right weakness and aphasia. Last known well was eight hours earlier. What is the most appropriate approach to reperfusion eligibility?

Show answer and explanations for case 36
  1. A. Urgent stroke assessment; vascular and advanced tissue imaging as indicated (Best answer)

    Selected unknown-onset or later-presenting patients may qualify through imaging-based criteria.

  2. B. Exclude every reperfusion treatment solely because onset was unwitnessed (Why this does not fit)

    Unknown onset does not automatically end eligibility assessment.

  3. C. Give thrombolysis automatically without evaluating imaging or contraindications (Why this does not fit)

    Extended-window pathways require selection, not automatic treatment.

  4. D. Delay imaging until the next day to see whether weakness resolves (Why this does not fit)

    A possible treatable occlusion requires urgent evaluation.

Takeaway: Unknown onset changes the selection pathway rather than eliminating all options.

Case sources: [10]

Case 37

A patient has disabling brainstem deficits, NIHSS 16, and CTA-confirmed basilar artery occlusion 12 hours after last known well. Imaging and clinical assessment otherwise support intervention. Which statement is most appropriate?

Show answer and explanations for case 37
  1. A. Posterior circulation occlusions are never treated with thrombectomy (Why this does not fit)

    That is inconsistent with current guidance.

  2. B. Twelve hours automatically excludes all endovascular therapy (Why this does not fit)

    Selected treatment windows extend beyond six hours.

  3. C. NIHSS alone authorizes treatment without imaging or clinical review (Why this does not fit)

    The score is one part of selection, not a substitute for it.

  4. D. Urgently evaluate selected basilar occlusion for thrombectomy within 24 hours (Best answer)

    The 2026 guideline specifically addresses this selected population.

Takeaway: Basilar occlusion has a current evidence-based thrombectomy pathway.

Case sources: [10]

Case 38

A patient taking insulin suddenly becomes confused with right-sided weakness. Point-of-care glucose is 31 mg/dL. What is the best immediate action while the neurologic evaluation continues?

Show answer and explanations for case 38
  1. A. Give thrombolysis before correcting the profound hypoglycemia in this patient (Why this does not fit)

    The readily reversible metabolic abnormality needs immediate correction and assessment.

  2. B. Treat improvement after glucose correction as permanent exclusion of all vascular disease (Why this does not fit)

    Response helps interpretation but does not replace clinical judgment if concerning findings remain.

  3. C. Correct glucose promptly; reassess and continue stroke evaluation if deficits persist (Best answer)

    Low glucose is a treatable mimic and can itself injure the brain, but persistent focal findings still need assessment.

  4. D. Disregard the low glucose, since focal weakness establishes an arterial occlusion (Why this does not fit)

    Hypoglycemia can produce focal deficits.

Takeaway: Check and correct glucose early without losing track of persistent focal deficits.

Case sources: [10] [15]

Case 39

A postpartum patient develops progressive headache and a focal seizure. MRI shows parasagittal edema with a small hemorrhagic lesion, and MR venography shows superior sagittal sinus thrombosis. Which mechanism best explains the findings?

Show answer and explanations for case 39
  1. A. Brain injury from hypoglycemia alone (Why this does not fit)

    No hypoglycemia is described, and the sinus thrombosis provides a coherent mechanism.

  2. B. Venous outflow obstruction with congestion and venous injury (Best answer)

    The sinus thrombus can cause edema, hemorrhage, seizures, and headache outside a simple arterial territory.

  3. C. Arterial occlusion confined to the left MCA superior division (Why this does not fit)

    That does not explain the directly demonstrated venous obstruction and parasagittal pattern.

  4. D. Primary migraine with no underlying structural process (Why this does not fit)

    The venographic and parenchymal abnormalities establish a secondary vascular process.

Takeaway: Venous stroke can combine headache, seizures, edema, and hemorrhage.

Case sources: [12]

Case 40

Three days after a documented left MCA ischemic infarct, a patient worsens. Repeat CT shows new petechial blood within the previously infarcted tissue. Which description is most appropriate?

Show answer and explanations for case 40
  1. A. Hemorrhagic transformation of the ischemic infarct (Best answer)

    The prior infarct and new blood in the same tissue establish the temporal and anatomical relationship.

  2. B. Primary hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage unrelated to the preceding infarct (Why this does not fit)

    Primary hemorrhage is a differential, but petechial blood within documented infarcted tissue after several days supports hemorrhagic transformation.

  3. C. Infarct extension without hemorrhagic transformation (Why this does not fit)

    New blood establishes a hemorrhagic component. Pure ischemic extension cannot account for that CT finding.

  4. D. Cerebral amyloid angiopathy as the established cause (Why this does not fit)

    Amyloid angiopathy can cause lobar hemorrhage, but this imaging sequence supports blood appearing within a recent ischemic infarct. It does not establish amyloid disease.

Takeaway: Use prior imaging and the location of new blood to identify hemorrhagic transformation.

Case sources: [18]

Case 41

After prolonged severe hypotension, MRI shows bilateral infarcts at the junctions of ACA-MCA and MCA-PCA cortical territories. Which process best explains this distribution?

Show answer and explanations for case 41
  1. A. Bilateral MCA main-trunk embolic infarction as the only possible mechanism (Why this does not fit)

    Emboli may contribute to some border-zone infarcts, but this junctional pattern after profound hypotension supports compromised perfusion.

  2. B. Superior sagittal sinus thrombosis (Why this does not fit)

    Venous thrombosis can cause bilateral lesions, but the stated arterial border-zone distribution after hypotension favors an arterial perfusion mechanism.

  3. C. Selective hippocampal neuronal injury without territorial ischemia (Why this does not fit)

    These lesions occupy arterial junctions rather than an isolated hippocampal pattern. Severe hypoperfusion can produce border-zone infarction.

  4. D. Border-zone ischemia related to compromised perfusion (Best answer)

    Distal junctional territories can be vulnerable when systemic perfusion falls.

Takeaway: A watershed pattern is a perfusion map, not a ranking of cell fragility.

Case sources: [13] [18]

Case 42

After recovery from a cardiac arrest, a patient has disproportionate difficulty forming new memories. MRI shows bilateral hippocampal injury. Which neuronal population is particularly vulnerable in this region?

Show answer and explanations for case 42
  1. A. CA3 pyramidal neurons (Why this does not fit)

    CA3 participates in hippocampal circuitry, but CA1 has greater classic vulnerability to brief global ischemia.

  2. B. Dentate granule cells (Why this does not fit)

    These are hippocampal neurons, but the canonical selectively vulnerable population tested here is CA1 pyramidal cells.

  3. C. CA1 pyramidal neurons (Best answer)

    These neurons are selectively vulnerable to hypoxic-ischemic injury and contribute to hippocampal memory function.

  4. D. CA2 pyramidal neurons (Why this does not fit)

    CA1 pyramidal neurons are particularly vulnerable to hypoxic-ischemic injury. CA2 is not the characteristic selectively vulnerable hippocampal population tested here.

Takeaway: Use regional anatomy to connect post-hypoxic deficits to vulnerable neurons.

Case sources: [13]

Case 43

A patient survives profound systemic hypoxemia and later has marked gait and limb ataxia. Imaging shows diffuse cerebellar cortical injury. Which vulnerable neuronal population is most relevant?

Show answer and explanations for case 43
  1. A. Cerebellar granule cells (Why this does not fit)

    Granule cells participate in cerebellar processing, but Purkinje cells are the classic selectively vulnerable cortical population in hypoxic injury.

  2. B. Purkinje cells (Best answer)

    These cerebellar cortical neurons are vulnerable to hypoxic injury and are important for coordination.

  3. C. Cerebellar basket cells (Why this does not fit)

    These inhibitory interneurons are anatomically relevant, but they are not the characteristic selectively vulnerable output neurons emphasized in this setting.

  4. D. Cerebellar Golgi cells (Why this does not fit)

    Golgi interneurons regulate local input processing; Purkinje cell injury is the more characteristic hypoxic cortical association.

Takeaway: Cerebellar dysfunction after global injury has a different anatomical substrate from hippocampal amnesia.

Case sources: [13] [2]

Case 44

A patient is found unconscious with glucose 24 mg/dL but no documented cardiac arrest or hypoxemia. MRI shows bilateral white-matter and cortical diffusion abnormalities. Which interpretation is most accurate?

Show answer and explanations for case 44
  1. A. Hypoglycemic injury fits; its anatomy need not match hypoxic-ischemic injury (Best answer)

    Primary MRI observations show variable involvement and potential reversibility after glucose-related injury.

  2. B. The diffusion pattern establishes PCA infarction as the cause of every lesion (Why this does not fit)

    Bilateral white-matter and cortical abnormalities need not follow one arterial territory.

  3. C. White-matter injury excludes hypoglycemia as the cause of these MRI findings (Why this does not fit)

    White-matter involvement has been reported in hypoglycemic encephalopathy.

  4. D. Diffusion abnormalities establish permanent severe disability regardless of the course (Why this does not fit)

    Outcome depends on the clinical course and injury extent; diffusion findings alone do not provide that certainty.

Takeaway: Similar energy failure does not guarantee identical anatomy or prognosis.

Case sources: [15]

Case 45

Six weeks after severe global brain injury, a patient opens the eyes and has sleep-wake cycles. Repeated standardized assessments show reflex responses but no behavioral evidence of awareness after confounders are addressed. Which term best describes the observed state?

Show answer and explanations for case 45
  1. A. Coma (Why this does not fit)

    Coma lacks wakefulness and ordinary eye-opening cycles.

  2. B. Classic locked-in syndrome established by eye opening alone (Why this does not fit)

    Locked-in syndrome requires evidence of preserved awareness despite output failure; eye opening alone is insufficient.

  3. C. Global aphasia as a complete explanation (Why this does not fit)

    A language disorder alone does not account for the entire assessed consciousness pattern.

  4. D. Unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (Best answer)

    Wakefulness is present without demonstrated awareness on appropriate repeated assessment.

Takeaway: Describe wakefulness and evidence of awareness separately, using repeated assessment.

Case sources: [14]

Case 46

Twenty-four hours after cardiac arrest, a sedated patient does not follow commands. A family asks whether an estimated five-minute arrest duration proves there can be no meaningful recovery. Which response best follows current guidance?

Show answer and explanations for case 46
  1. A. Guarantee full recovery on the basis of the preserved pupillary light responses (Why this does not fit)

    One favorable sign cannot guarantee an outcome.

  2. B. Use the initial examination as the sole prognostic test and cancel further testing (Why this does not fit)

    Serial examination and additional modalities are important to reduce error.

  3. C. Explain the need for delayed multimodal prognosis after addressing confounders (Best answer)

    Arrest duration and a sedated early examination cannot independently establish an individual outcome.

  4. D. Declare irreversible injury because the estimated arrest lasted over four minutes (Why this does not fit)

    A universal time cutoff is not a valid individualized prognostic rule.

Takeaway: Prognostication after cardiac arrest is a timed, multimodal process.

Case sources: [16]

Case 47

A patient with severe acute blood loss has hemoglobin 4.1 g/dL and a pulse oximeter reading of 99%. He becomes confused during hypotension. Why can cerebral oxygen delivery still be critically reduced?

Show answer and explanations for case 47
  1. A. Pulse oximetry directly measures cerebral metabolic demand (Why this does not fit)

    Oximetry estimates arterial hemoglobin saturation. It does not quantify tissue demand, hemoglobin concentration or cerebral blood flow.

  2. B. Saturation measures neither available hemoglobin nor adequacy of perfusion (Best answer)

    Severe anemia and low blood flow can reduce oxygen delivery despite high saturation.

  3. C. A saturation of 99% guarantees normal cerebral oxygen content and flow (Why this does not fit)

    Saturation is only one component of oxygen delivery.

  4. D. Normal saturation excludes an oxygen-delivery problem when lung function is intact (Why this does not fit)

    Adequate saturation of the remaining hemoglobin does not fully compensate for profound anemia and hypotension. Oxygen content and flow can both be inadequate.

Takeaway: Oxygen delivery depends on content and blood flow, not saturation alone.

Case sources: [13]

Case 48

A 59-year-old is evaluated 14 hours after a first headache that peaked within seconds. CT is negative. Lumbar puncture performed because suspicion persists shows bilirubin-related xanthochromia. There is no recent trauma. Which diagnosis must now be urgently investigated with vascular imaging?

Show answer and explanations for case 48
  1. A. Subarachnoid hemorrhage with assessment for an aneurysmal source (Best answer)

    Explosive onset and bilirubin-related xanthochromia support subarachnoid bleeding despite a delayed negative CT. Vascular evaluation is needed to identify an aneurysm or another source; the fluid finding alone does not prove an aneurysm.

  2. B. Primary thunderclap headache without a secondary cause (Why this does not fit)

    A primary diagnosis requires exclusion of secondary causes. Evidence of blood breakdown in CSF makes an unexplained benign thunderclap diagnosis inappropriate.

  3. C. Uncomplicated RCVS with no associated hemorrhage (Why this does not fit)

    RCVS can produce thunderclap headache and can be complicated by subarachnoid bleeding. It cannot explain away evidence of bleeding as an uncomplicated nonhemorrhagic episode; vascular imaging must assess the cause.

  4. D. Migraine without aura causing the headache episode (Why this does not fit)

    A first explosive headache with bilirubin-related xanthochromia is not explained by uncomplicated migraine. The CSF finding requires a hemorrhage evaluation.

Takeaway: Delayed negative CT does not exclude SAH. Evidence of subarachnoid bleeding requires urgent evaluation of its source.

Case sources: [17]

Search Bone Wizardry

Quick links