Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is the second most common cause of stroke and accounts for 8% to 15% of strokes in Western societies with an estimated incidence of 10 to 25 per 100 000 persons.1–3 Despite advances in the field of stroke and neurocritical care,4 the 30-day mortality has not changed significantly over the past 20 years.3 Indeed, ICH has the highest rates of dependence or death among stroke types and proven treatments are lacking. Clinical trials aimed at limiting hemorrhage growth, procoagulant agents for hemostasis,5 and surgical evacuation6 have not translated into improved clinical outcomes. Antihypertensive therapy for the purpose of reducing hematoma growth has been a mainstay of acute management. Guidelines recommend maintaining mean arterial pressure <130 mm Hg during the acute phase7; however, controversies exist given the lack of randomized clinical trial data and uncertainties about the rapidity and target level of blood pressure (BP)-lowering. Recent Phase 2 clinical trials evaluating acute BP control have shown promise in reducing hematoma expansion with an adequate safety profile and Phase 3 trials are underway.8,9 Besides hematoma growth, other pathophysiological processes occur in the setting of ICH and may serve as potential therapeutic targets. In the acute period after ICH, a rapid rise in intracranial pressure (ICP) from an expanding hematoma may reduce cerebral perfusion pressure. In this setting, interventions aimed at BP-lowering and hemostasis may theoretically induce thrombosis or exacerbate brain ischemia, particularly in patients with pre-existing cerebrovascular disease. A recent publication suggests that aggressive BP-lowering may actually cause acute brain ischemia and worsen outcomes after ICH.10 In this review, we outline the data on secondary acute ischemic injury after ICH, review the prevalence of remote ischemic lesions and risk factors associated with their occurrence, explore potential …