Explore the vast range of titles available.

Since there are contradictory data regarding the association of antiplatelet pretreatment (AP) with safety and efficacy outcomes of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of available randomized-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) to investigate the association of AP with outcomes of AIS patients treated with intravenous alteplase. The outcome events of interest included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), fatal ICH, complete recanalization (CR), 3-month favorable functional outcome (FFO, mRS score 0–1), 3-month functional independence (FI, mRS score 0–2), and mortality. The corresponding odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for all the outcome events using random-effects model. The adjusted age and admission NIHSS OR (OR adjusted ) were also estimated for all available outcomes. We included 7 RCTs (4376 patients, 33.7% with AP). In unadjusted analyses, AP was associated with higher likelihood of sICH (OR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.40–2.56), death (OR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.24–2.03), and lower likelihood of 3-month FI (OR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.56–0.85). No association was detected between AP and fatal ICH (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 0.75–3.15), 3-month FFO (OR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.58–1.07), and CR (OR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.04–11.66). After adjustment for age and admission stroke severity, AP was not related to sICH (OR adjusted  = 1.67, 95% CI 0.75–3.72), 3-month FI (OR adjusted  = 0.88, 95% CI 0.54–1.42), or death (OR adjusted  = 1.01, 95% CI 0.55–1.86) in adjusted analyses. In conclusion, after adjusting for confounders, AP was not associated with a higher risk of sICH and worse 3-month functional outcome in AIS treated with intravenous alteplase. Antiplatelet intake prior to tPA-bolus should not be used as a reason to withhold or lower alteplase dose in AIS patients treated with IVT.

Objectives: Current recommendations advocate that pretreatment with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) should first be offered to all eligible patients with emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO) before an endovascular thrombectomy (ET) procedure. However, there are observational data that question the safety and efficacy of IVT pretreatment in patients with ELVO. Methods: We performed a meta-analysis of the included subgroups from ET randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the comparative efficacy between direct ET without IVT pretreatment and bridging therapy (IVT and ET) in patients with ELVO. Results: We included a total of seven RCTs, including 1764 patients with ELVO (52.8% men). Patients receiving bridging therapy (IVT followed by ET) had lower rates (p = 0.041) of 90-day death/severe dependency (modified Rankin Scale-score of 5–6; 19.0%, 95% CI: 14.1–25.1%) compared with patients receiving only ET (31.0%, 95% CI: 21.2–42.9%). Moreover, patients receiving IVT and ET had a nonsignificant (p = 0.389) trend towards higher 90-day functional independence rates (51.4%, 95% CI: 42.5–60.1%) compared with patients undergoing only ET (41.7%, 95% CI: 24.1–61.7%). Finally, shift-analysis uncovered a nonsignificant trend towards functional improvement at 90 days for bridging therapy over ET (cOR = 1.28, 95% CI: 0.91–1.89; p = 0.155). It should be noted that patients included in the present meta-analysis were not randomized to receive IVT, and thus the two groups (bridging therapy versus ET monotherapy) may differ in terms of baseline characteristics and, in particular, in terms of onset to groin puncture time and thus the risk of confounding bias cannot be ruled out. Conclusion: Despite the limitations and the risk of confounding bias, our findings contradict the recent notion regarding potential equality between ET and bridging therapy in ELVO patients and suggest that IVT and ET are complementary therapies that should be pursued in a parallel and noncompeting fashion.

The safety and efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in dissection-related ischemic stroke (DRIS) has not been established. We sought to determine safety and recovery rates of IVT in DRIS using prospective, international, multicenter data and by conducting a comprehensive meta-analysis of reported case series. We analyzed consecutive DRIS patients treated with IVT according to national guidelines during a 5-year period at six tertiary-care stroke centers, and also conducted a comprehensive review and meta-analysis of all available case series reporting safety outcomes in DRIS treated with IVT according to PRISMA guidelines. A total of 39 DRIS patients (mean age 60 ± 18 years; 59 % men; median NIHSS 13 points, IQR 9–17) received IVT in our multicenter study. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), in-hospital mortality, complete recanalization, favorable functional outcome (FFO; mRS-score of 0–1) and functional independence (FI; mRS-score of 0–2) were 0 % (adjusted Wald 95 % CI 0–8 %), 10 % (3–24 %), 55 % (40–70 %), 61 % (45–74 %) and 68 % (52–81 %). The pooled sICH and mortality rates in meta-analysis including 10 case series (234 IVT-DRIS patients) were 2 % (0–5 %) and 4 % (0–8 %). The pooled recanalization, FFO and FI rates were 45 % (26–67 %), 41 % (29–54 %) and 61 % (48–72 %), respectively. Substantial heterogeneity was only found for FFO ( I 2  = 61 %; p  = 0.006). Subsequent meta-regression analysis identified baseline NIHSS and dissection in the posterior circulation as independent predictors of FFO ( p  < 0.05), accounting for FFO variance across different studies. Our prospective, international data coupled with comprehensive meta-analysis results underscore IVT safety in DRIS, while further independent validation is required in larger observational registries or RCTs.

Background: Prior to the conduct of the Head Position in Stroke Trial (HeadPoST), an international survey (n = 128) revealed equipoise for selection of head position in acute ischemic stroke. Objectives: We aimed to determine whether equipoise exists for head position in spontaneous hyperacute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients following HeadPoST. Design: This is an international, web-distributed survey focused on head positioning in hyperacute ICH patients. Methods: A survey was constructed to examine clinicians’ beliefs and practices associated with head positioning of hyperacute ICH patients. Survey items were developed with content experts, piloted, and then refined before distributing through stroke listservs, social media, and purposive snowball sampling. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and χ2 test. Results: We received 181 responses representing 13 countries on four continents: 38% advanced practice providers, 32% bedside nurses, and 30% physicians; overall, participants had median 7 [interquartile range (IQR) = 3–12] years stroke experience with a median of 100 (IQR = 37.5–200) ICH admissions managed annually. Participants disagreed that HeadPoST provided ‘definitive evidence’ for head position in ICH and agreed that their ‘written admission orders include 30-degree head positioning’, with 54% citing hospital policies for this head position in hyperacute ICH. Participants were unsure whether head positioning alone could influence ICH longitudinal outcomes. Use of serial proximal clinical and technology measures during the head positioning intervention were identified by 82% as the most appropriate endpoints for future ICH head positioning trials. Conclusion: Interdisciplinary providers remain unconvinced by HeadPoST results that head position does not matter in hyperacute ICH. Future trials examining the proximal effects of head positioning on clinical stability in hyperacute ICH are warranted.

Pulsed-wave ultrasound increases the exposure of an intracranial thrombus to alteplase (recombinant tissue plasminogen activator), potentially facilitating early reperfusion. We aimed to ascertain if a novel operator-independent transcranial ultrasound device delivering low-power high-frequency ultrasound could improve functional outcome in patients treated with alteplase after acute ischaemic stroke. We did a multicentre, double-blind, phase 3, randomised controlled trial (CLOTBUST-ER) at 76 medical centres in 14 countries. We included patients with acute ischaemic stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≥10) who received intravenous thrombolysis (alteplase bolus) within 3 h of symptom onset in North America and within 4·5 h of symptom onset in all other countries. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) via an interactive web response system to either active ultrasound (2 MHz pulsed-wave ultrasound for 120 min [sonothrombolysis]; intervention group) or sham ultrasound (control group). Ultrasound was delivered using an operator-independent device, which had to be activated within 30 min of the alteplase bolus. Participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes were unaware of group assignments. The primary outcome was improvement in the modified Rankin Scale score at 90 days in patients enrolled within 3 h of symptom onset, assessed in the intention-to-treat population as a common odds ratio (cOR) using ordinal logistic regression shift analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01098981. The trial was stopped early by the funder after the second interim analysis because of futility. Between August, 2013, and April, 2015, 335 patients were randomly allocated to the intervention group and 341 patients to the control group. Compared with the control group, the adjusted cOR for an improvement in modified Rankin Scale score at 90 days in the intervention group was 1·05 (95% CI 0·77–1·45; p=0·74). 51 (16%) of 317 patients in the intervention group and 44 (13%) of 329 patients in the control group died (unadjusted OR 1·24, 95% CI 0·80–1·92; p=0·37) and 83 (26%) and 79 (24%), respectively, had serious adverse events (1·12, 0·79–1·60; p=0·53). Sonothrombolysis delivered by an operator-independent device to patients treated with alteplase after acute ischaemic stroke was feasible and most likely safe, but no clinical benefit was seen at 90 days. Sonothrombolysis could be further investigated either in randomised trials undertaken in stroke centres that are dependent on patient transfer for endovascular reperfusion therapies or in countries where these treatments cannot yet be offered as the standard of care. Cerevast Therapeutics.

Objectives: The cumulative safety and efficacy measures of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (PTAS) for secondary stroke prevention in patients with symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis (sICAS) have not previously been evaluated using a meta-analytical approach. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and random effects meta-analysis of all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the safety and efficacy of PTAS (in comparison with medical therapy) for sICAS. Results: Three RCTs (678 total patients) were included in the quantitative analysis. PTAS was associated with a higher risk of recurrent ischemic stroke in the territory of qualifying artery both within 30 days [risk ratio (RR) = 2.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10–4.43] and 1 year (RR = 1.92, 95% CI 1.10–3.36). PTAS was also related to a higher risk of any ischemic stroke within 30 days from the index event (RR = 2.08, 95% CI 1.17–3.71). The risk for intracranial hemorrhage was found to be higher in PTAS patients both within 30 days (RR = 10.60, 95% CI 1.98–56.62) and 1 year (RR = 8.15, 95% CI 1.50–44.34). The composite outcome of any stroke or death within 1 year (RR = 2.29, 95% CI 1.13–4.66) and 2 years (RR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.04–2.21) was higher in PTAS than in medical therapy. PTAS was associated with a higher risk of any stroke or death within 2 years in the sICAS subgroup located in posterior circulation (RR = 2.37, 95% CI 1.27–4.42). Conclusions: PTAS is associated with adverse early and long-term outcomes and should not be recommended in patients with sICAS. Further research to identify subgroups of patients who could also serve as candidates for future interventional trials along with efforts to reduce procedure-related complications are needed.

Background: Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have shown to be both safe and effective for ischemic stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) using published data from secondary prevention subgroups of different phase III randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing individual NOACs with warfarin. Methods: Eligible studies were identified by searching MEDLINE and SCOPUS and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. First, we conducted a pairwise meta-analysis for each pairwise comparison, and then we performed NMA to combine direct and indirect evidence for any given pair of treatments. The comparative effects of all NOACs against warfarin were ranked with the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve for each outcome. Results: We identified four RCTs (including 15,240 patients) comparing individual NOACs (apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban) with warfarin. Using indirect evidence, dabigatran was related to a significantly lower risk of hemorrhagic stroke compared with rivaroxaban [risk ratio (RR) 0.28; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11–0.75], while rivaroxaban was associated with a significantly lower risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding compared with dabigatran (RR 0.14; 95% CI 0.03–0.74). We also performed clustered ranking plot for the primary efficacy and safety endpoints to identify the treatment with the probably best benefit-to-risk ratio profile. Conclusions: The three NOACs showed differences in terms of safety and efficacy for secondary stroke prevention in NVAF. Our findings can serve only as hypothesis generation and require independent confirmation in head-to-head RCTs, owing to the sparse available evidence and increased uncertainty in both indirect effect estimates and ranking of treatments.

Background The use of antithrombotic agents, including anticoagulants, antiplatelet agents, and thrombolytics has increased over the last decade and is expected to continue to rise. Although antithrombotic-associated intracranial hemorrhage can be devastating, rapid reversal of coagulopathy may help limit hematoma expansion and improve outcomes. Methods The Neurocritical Care Society, in conjunction with the Society of Critical Care Medicine, organized an international, multi-institutional committee with expertise in neurocritical care, neurology, neurosurgery, stroke, hematology, hemato-pathology, emergency medicine, pharmacy, nursing, and guideline development to evaluate the literature and develop an evidence-based practice guideline. Formalized literature searches were conducted, and studies meeting the criteria established by the committee were evaluated. Results Utilizing the GRADE methodology, the committee developed recommendations for reversal of vitamin K antagonists, direct factor Xa antagonists, direct thrombin inhibitors, unfractionated heparin, low-molecular weight heparin, heparinoids, pentasaccharides, thrombolytics, and antiplatelet agents in the setting of intracranial hemorrhage. Conclusions This guideline provides timely, evidence-based reversal strategies to assist practitioners in the care of patients with antithrombotic-associated intracranial hemorrhage.

BackgroundThe use of antithrombotic agents, including anticoagulants, antiplatelet agents, and thrombolytics has increased over the last decade and is expected to continue to rise. Although antithrombotic-associated intracranial hemorrhage can be devastating, rapid reversal of coagulopathy may help limit hematoma expansion and improve outcomes.MethodsThe Neurocritical Care Society, in conjunction with the Society of Critical Care Medicine, organized an international, multi-institutional committee with expertise in neurocritical care, neurology, neurosurgery, stroke, hematology, hemato-pathology, emergency medicine, pharmacy, nursing, and guideline development to evaluate the literature and develop an evidence-based practice guideline. Formalized literature searches were conducted, and studies meeting the criteria established by the committee were evaluated.ResultsUtilizing the GRADE methodology, the committee developed recommendations for reversal of vitamin K antagonists, direct factor Xa antagonists, direct thrombin inhibitors, unfractionated heparin, low-molecular weight heparin, heparinoids, pentasaccharides, thrombolytics, and antiplatelet agents in the setting of intracranial hemorrhage.ConclusionsThis guideline provides timely, evidence-based reversal strategies to assist practitioners in the care of patients with antithrombotic-associated intracranial hemorrhage.

Background: In the USA, stable intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IV tPA) patients have traditionally been cared for in an intensive care unit (ICU). We examined the safety of using an acuity-adaptable stroke unit (SU) to manage IV tPA patients. Methods: We conducted an observational study of consecutive patients admitted to our acuity-adaptable SU over the first 3 years of operation. Safety was assessed by symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) rates, systemic hemorrhage (SH) rates, tPA-related deaths, and transfers from SU to ICU; cost savings and length of stay (LOS) were determined. Results: We admitted 333 IV tPA patients, of which 302 were admitted directly to the SU. A total of 31 (10%) patients had concurrent systemic hemodynamic or pulmonary compromise warranting direct ICU admission. There were no differences in admission National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores between SU and ICU patients (9.0 versus 9.5, respectively). Overall sICH rate was 3.3% (n = 10) and SH rate was 2.9 (n = 9), with no difference between SU and ICU patients. No tPA-related deaths occurred, and no SU patients required transfer to the ICU. Estimated hospital cost savings were US$362,400 for ‘avoided’ ICU days, and hospital LOS decreased significantly (p = 0.001) from 9.8 ± 15.6 days (median 5) in year 1, to 5.2 ± 4.8 days (median 3) by year 3. Conclusions: IV tPA patients may be safely cared for in a SU when nurses undergo extensive education to ensure clinical competence. Use of the ICU solely for monitoring may constitute significant overuse of system resources at an expense that is not associated with additional safety benefit.