Search

* on behalf of the Stroke Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry (STAR) Collaborators Introduction: Intravenous thrombolysis complications are enriched in AF associated stroke, as these patients have worse functional outcomes, less effective recanalization, and increased rates of hemorrhagic complications. These data suggest that AF patients may be at particularly high risk for complications of bridging therapy for large vessel occlusions treated with mechanical thrombectomy (MT). Here we determine whether clinical outcomes differ in AF associated stroke treated with MT and bridging therapy. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of the Stroke and Aneurysm Registry (STAR) from January 2015 to December 2018 and identified 4,169 patients who underwent MT for an anterior circulation stroke, 1,517 (36.4 %) of which had comorbid AF. Prospectively defined baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared. Results: Hemorrhagic complications after MT were similar in patients with or without AF. In patients without AF, bridging therapy improved 90-day outcomes (aOR 1.32, 1.02-1.74, p Conclusions: Bridging therapy in AF patients undergoing thrombectomy independently increased the odds of intracranial hemorrhage and did not improve functional outcomes. AF patients may represent a high-risk subgroup for thrombolytic complications. Randomized trials are warranted to determine whether patients with AF associated stroke may benefit by deferring bridging therapy at thrombectomy-capable centers.

Background: There are limited data on the baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients who have recurrent hemispheric syndromes in the territory of symptomatic atherosclerotic internal carotid artery occlusion (AICAO). Methods: Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared between patients with (rHEM+) and without (rHEM-) recurrent ipsilateral hemispheric syndromes at the time of randomization into the Carotid Occlusion Surgery Study (COSS) based on local investigator clinical impression. Results: Of 195 participants who were randomized, 100 (51%) were rHEM+ (50 in each study arm) and 95 were rHEM-(48 nonsurgical, 47 surgical). Baseline characteristics between rHEM+ and rHEM- participants were similar except that rHEM+ participants were more likely to have had a previous stroke prior to entry event (59% vs 22%, p < 0.001) and to have had TIA vs stroke as the entry event (61% vs 20%, p 0.10). For the nonsurgical participants, there was no statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint for those rHEM+ vs rHEM- (26.3% vs 18.9%, p=.410) Conclusion: Patients with recurrent hemispheric stroke syndromes enrolled in the COSS trial were more likely to have had previous stroke and to have TIAs as the entry event to randomization. Given the lack of surgical treatment benefit seen in these patients, early aggressive risk factor measures should be prioritized to reduce recurrent strokes, including blood pressure control which was associated with a 70% reduction in stroke in the nonsurgical group in COSS ( Neurology 2014; 82:1027-1032).

Background and Purpose— To develop recommendations for the establishment of comprehensive stroke centers capable of delivering the full spectrum of care to seriously ill patients with stroke and cerebrovascular disease. Recommendations were developed by members of the Brain Attack Coalition (BAC), which is a multidisciplinary group of members from major professional organizations involved with the care of patients with stroke and cerebrovascular disease. Summary of Review— A comprehensive literature search was conducted from 1966 through December 2004 using Medline and Pub Med. Articles with information about clinical trials, meta-analyses, care guidelines, scientific guidelines, and other relevant clinical and research reports were examined and graded using established evidence-based medicine approaches for therapeutic and diagnostic modalities. Evidence was also obtained from a questionnaire survey sent to leaders in cerebrovascular disease. Members of BAC reviewed literature related to their field and graded the scientific evidence on the various diagnostic and treatment modalities for stroke. Input was obtained from the organizations represented by BAC. BAC met on several occasions to review each specific recommendation and reach a consensus about its importance in light of other medical, logistical, and financial factors. Conclusions— There are a number of key areas supported by evidence-based medicine that are important for a comprehensive stroke center and its ability to deliver the wide variety of specialized care needed by patients with serious cerebrovascular disease. These areas include: (1) health care personnel with specific expertise in a number of disciplines, including neurosurgery and vascular neurology; (2) advanced neuroimaging capabilities such as MRI and various types of cerebral angiography; (3) surgical and endovascular techniques, including clipping and coiling of intracranial aneurysms, carotid endarterectomy, and intra-arterial thrombolytic therapy; and (4) other specific infrastructure and programmatic elements such as an intensive care unit and a stroke registry. Integration of these elements into a coordinated hospital-based program or system is likely to improve outcomes of patients with strokes and complex cerebrovascular disease who require the services of a comprehensive stroke center.