Search

Introduction: We aimed to investigate the prevalence of cognitive impairment in the subacute phase after transient ischemic attack (TIA) and ischemic stroke (IS), factors associated with a vascular cognitive disorder, and the prevalence of subjective cognitive complaints and their relation with objective cognitive performance.Patients and methods: In this multicenter prospective cohort study, we recruited patients with first-ever TIA and IS, aged 18–49 years, between 2013 and 2021 for cognitive assessment up to 6 months after index event. We calculated composite Z-scores for seven cognitive domains. We defined cognitive impairment as a composite Z-score < −1.5. We defined major vascular cognitive disorder as a Z-score < −2.0 in one or more cognitive domains.Results: Fifty three TIA and 545 IS patients completed cognitive assessment with mean time to assessment of 89.7 (SD 40.7) days. The median NIHSS at admission was 3 (interquartile range, 1–5). Cognitive impairment was common in five domains (up to 37%), with similar proportion in TIA and IS patients. Patients with major vascular cognitive disorder had a lower education level, higher NIHSS scores and more frequent lesions in the left frontotemporal lobe than without vascular cognitive disorder (p< 0.05 FDR-corrected). Subjective memory and executive cognitive complaints were present in about two-thirds of the patients, but were weakly associated with objective cognitive performance (β: −0.32 and −0.21, respectively).Discussion and conclusion: In the subacute phase after TIA or stroke in young adults, cognitive impairment and subjective cognitive complaints are prevalent, but they are weakly associated with each other.

Introduction Deficits of emotion recognition after ischemic stroke are often overlooked by clinicians, and are mostly not spontaneously reported by patients. However, impaired emotion recognition after stroke negatively affects the ability to return to work and the quality of life. It is still unknown how often impairments of emotion recognition occur shortly after ischemic stroke. We aimed to estimate the occurrence of impaired emotion recognition after ischemic stroke and to characterise these patients with impaired emotion recognition.Patients and methods Two hundred thirty patients were included, derived from a prospective study of cognitive recovery. Five weeks after ischemic stroke a neuropsychological assessment was performed, including an emotion recognition task (i.e. Ekman 60-faces test). Emotion recognition was regarded as impaired if the total score was below the fifth percentile for a large independent reference sample.Results Emotion recognition was impaired in 33.5% of patients. Patients with impaired emotion recognition were more likely to have an abnormal Montreal Cognitive Assessment during hospitalisation, and 5 weeks after their stroke, a higher proportion of them had a vascular cognitive disorder (VCD). Even 20% of patients without VCD had impaired emotion recognition. Discussion:Emotion recognition was often impaired after ischemic stroke. This is clinically relevant, since impaired emotion recognition negatively impacts social functioning. Conclusion:Even when there was no cognitive disorder in traditional cognitive domains, emotion recognition was impaired in 1 out of 5 patients. Clinicians should systematically ask patients and their caregivers about deficits in emotion recognition, and, if needed, test for these deficits.

Introduction Treatment restrictions in the first 2 days after intracerebral haemorrhage have been independently associated with an increased risk of early death. It is unknown whether these restrictions also affect mortality if these are installed several days after stroke onset.Patients and methods Sixty patients with severe functional dependence at day 4 after ischaemic stroke or intracerebral haemorrhage were included in this prospective two-centre cohort study. The presence of treatment restrictions was assessed at the day of inclusion. Information about mortality, functional outcome (modified Rankin scale) score and quality of life (visual analogue scale) was recorded 6 months after stroke onset. Poor outcome was defined as modified Rankin scale >3. Satisfactory quality of life was defined as visual analogue scale ≥ 60.Results At 6 months, 30 patients had died, 19 survivors had a poor functional outcome and 9 patients had a poor quality of life. Treatment restrictions were independently associated with mortality at 6 months (adjusted relative risk, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.59; p = 0.01), but not with functional outcome.Discussion Our findings were observed in 60 selected patients with severe stroke.Conclusion The instalment of treatment restrictions by itself may increase the risk of death after stroke, even if the first 4 days have passed. In future stroke studies, this potential confounder should be taken into account. Quality of life was satisfactory in the majority of the survivors, despite considerable disability.

Background We aimed to investigate the extent of pharmacokinetic drug interactions between bosentan and a fixed combination of lopinavir/ritonavir.Methods This was a three-way crossover study in 12 healthy male participants treated with bosentan (125 mg twice daily) and lopinavir/ritonavir (400/100 mg twice daily) alone or in combination for 9.5 days.Results Combination treatment resulted in slightly lower area under the concentration–time curve during the 12 h dosing interval under steady-state conditions (AUCt,ss) values of both lopinavir and ritonavir with geometric mean ratios (GMRs; 90% confidence intervals [CIs]) of 0.86 (0.74–0.99) for lopinavir and 0.83 (0.76–0.92) for ritonavir. The maximum concentration in steady state (Cmax, ss) of lopinavir and ritonavir remained unchanged with a GMR of 0.95 and 1.01, respectively, and the 90% CIs were within the range of 0.8–1.25. The observed effects of bosentan on lopinavir and ritonavir pharmacokinetics were considered to be not clinically relevant. The pharmacokinetics of bosentan were strongly affected by coadministration. Bosentan concentration increased up to 48-fold during the first 4 days of coadministration with lopinavir/ritonavir. At steady state, the GMR for AUCt,sswas 5.22 (3.84– 7.10) and for Cmax, sswas 6.12 (4.24–8.82). The increased exposure to bosentan was reflected in an increase in adverse events attributed to bosentan, that is, mainly headache, but not in liver enzyme abnormalities.Conclusions Bosentan does not affect lopinavir and ritonavir exposure to a clinically relevant extent, but tolerability of bosentan should be monitored in HIV patients under antiretroviral therapy with lopinavir/ritonavir. It is anticipated that all ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors will have a similar effect on bosentan pharmacokinetics.