Search

Background: The usefulness of prehospital scales for identifying anterior circulation large vessel occlusion (aLVO) in patients with suspected stroke may vary depending on the severity of their presentation. The performance of these scales across the spectrum of deficit severity is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of 8 prehospital scales for identifying aLVO across the spectrum of deficit severity. Methods: We used data from the PRESTO study (Prehospital Triage of Patients With Suspected Stroke Symptoms), a prospective observational study comparing prehospital stroke scales in detecting aLVO in suspected stroke patients. We used the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, assessed in-hospital, as a proxy for the Clinical Global Impression of stroke severity during prehospital assessment by paramedics. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and the difference in aLVO probabilities with a positive or negative prehospital scale test (ΔP aLVO ) for each scale for mild (NIHSS 0–4), intermediate (NIHSS 5–9), moderate (NIHSS 10–14), and severe deficits (NIHSS≥15). Results: Among 1033 patients with suspected stroke, 119 (11.5%) had an aLVO, of whom 19 (16.0%) had mild, 25 (21.0%) had intermediate, 30 (25.2%) had moderate, and 45 (37.8%) had severe deficits. The scales had low sensitivity and positive predictive value in patients with mild-intermediate deficits, and poor specificity, negative predictive value, and accuracy with moderate-severe deficits. Positive results achieved the highest ΔP aLVO in patients with mild deficits. Negative results achieved the highest ΔP aLVO with severe deficits, but the probability of aLVO with a negative result in the severe range was higher than with a positive test in the mild range. Conclusions: Commonly-used prehospital stroke scales show variable performance across the range of deficit severity. Probability of aLVO remains high with a negative test in severely affected patients. Studies reporting prehospital stroke scale performance should be appraised in the context of the NIHSS distribution of their samples.

Background: We aimed to assess whether the effect of intravenous alteplase treatment (IVT) before endovascular treatment (EVT) on outcome is modified by first-line technique during EVT in IVT eligible patients. Methods: This was a post hoc analysis from MR CLEAN-NO IV (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands - Intravenous Treatment Followed by Intra-Arterial Treatment Versus Direct Intra-Arterial Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke Caused by a Proximal Intracranial Occlusion), a randomized trial of IVT followed by EVT versus EVT alone in patients presenting directly to EVT-capable centers. We included data from all patients who underwent EVT with a thrombectomy attempt. We compared patients treated with stent retriever (with or without aspiration) to aspiration alone as first-line EVT technique and assessed the interaction of first-line EVT technique with IVT treatment. Primary outcome was the 90-day modified Rankin Scale score, analyzed with mixed model ordinal regression for a shift towards better outcome. Secondary outcomes included successful reperfusion (extended Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score 2b–3). Results: Of 473 included patients, 102 (21.6%) were treated with aspiration alone as first-line technique. In the full population, functional outcome was similar for patients treated with stent retriever versus aspiration only (adjusted common odds ratio [acOR]‚ 1.07 [95% CI, 0.69–1.66]). We observed a significant interaction between IVT and first-line EVT technique ( P =0.03). In the aspiration-only group, patients treated with EVT alone had worse functional outcome compared to those treated with IVT and EVT (acOR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.21–0.90]). In the stent retriever group, functional outcome did not differ between patients treated with or without IVT (acOR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.74–1.57]). There was no statistically significant interaction for successful reperfusion. Conclusions: In MR CLEAN-NO IV, the treatment effect of IVT was modified by first-line EVT technique. Patients treated with aspiration only as first-line technique had worse clinical outcomes if they did not receive IVT. No such difference was observed in patients treated with stent retrievers. Confirmation by pooling with results from other trials is needed to confirm these findings.

Background and Purpose: The benefit of endovascular treatment (EVT) for posterior circulation stroke (PCS) remains uncertain, and little is known on treatment outcomes in clinical practice. This study evaluates outcomes of a large PCS cohort treated with EVT in clinical practice. Simultaneous to this observational study, several intervention centers participated in the BASICS trial (Basilar Artery International Cooperation Study), which tested the efficacy of EVT for basilar artery occlusion in a randomized setting. We additionally compared characteristics and outcomes of patients treated outside BASICS in trial centers to those from nontrial centers. Methods: We included patients with PCS from the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands Registry: a prospective, multicenter, observational study of patients who underwent EVT in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2018. Primary outcome was a score of 0 to 3 on the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included reperfusion status and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. For outcome comparison between patients treated in trial versus nontrial centers, we used ordinal logistic regression analysis. Results: We included 264 patients of whom 135 (51%) had received intravenous thrombolysis. The basilar artery was most often involved (77%). Favorable outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0–3) was observed in 115/252 (46%) patients, and 109/252 (43%) patients died. Successful reperfusion was achieved in 178/238 (75%), and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 9/264 (3%). The 154 nontrial patients receiving EVT in BASICS trial centers had similar characteristics and outcomes as the 110 patients treated in nontrial centers (modified Rankin Scale adjusted cOR: 0.77 [95% CI, 0.5–1.2]). Conclusions: Our study shows that high rates of favorable clinical outcome and successful reperfusion can be achieved with EVT for PCS, despite high mortality. Characteristics and outcomes of patients treated in trial versus nontrial centers were similar indicating that our cohort is representative of clinical practice in the Netherlands. Randomized studies using modern treatment approaches are needed for further insight in the benefit of EVT for PCS.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Background and Purpose: Benefit of early endovascular treatment (EVT) for ischemic stroke varies considerably among patients. The MR PREDICTS decision tool, derived from MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands), predicts outcome and treatment benefit based on baseline characteristics. Our aim was to externally validate and update MR PREDICTS with data from international trials and daily clinical practice. Methods: We used individual patient data from 6 randomized controlled trials within the HERMES (Highly Effective Reperfusion Evaluated in Multiple Endovascular Stroke Trials) collaboration to validate the original model. Then, we updated the model and performed a second validation with data from the observational MR CLEAN Registry. Primary outcome was functional independence (defined as modified Rankin Scale score 0–2) 3 months after stroke. Treatment benefit was defined as the difference between the probability of functional independence with and without EVT. Discriminative performance was evaluated using a concordance (C) statistic. Results: We included 1242 patients from HERMES (633 assigned to EVT, 609 assigned to control) and 3156 patients from the MR CLEAN Registry (all of whom underwent EVT within 6.5 hours). The C-statistic for functional independence was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.72–0.77) in HERMES and, after model updating, 0.80 (0.78–0.82) in the Registry. Median predicted treatment benefit of routinely treated patients (Registry) was 10.3% (interquartile range, 5.8%–14.4%). Patients with low (

Background and Purpose— Previous studies have reported less favorable outcome and less effect of endovascular treatment (EVT) after ischemic stroke in women than in men. Our aim was to study the influence of sex on outcome and on the effect of EVT for ischemic stroke in recent randomized trials on EVT. Methods— We used data from 7 randomized controlled trials on EVT within the HERMES collaboration. The primary outcome was 90-day functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale). We compared baseline characteristics and outcomes between men and women. With ordinal logistic regression, we evaluated the association between EVT and 90-day functional outcome for men and women separately, adjusted for potential confounders. We tested for interaction between sex and EVT. Results— We included 1762 patients in the analyses, of whom 833 (47%) were women. Women were older (median, 70 versus 66 years; P P P P for interaction of 0.926. Conclusions— Sex does not influence clinical outcome after EVT and does not modify treatment effect of EVT. Therefore, sex should not be a consideration in the selection of patients for EVT.

Introduction: Intracranial hemorrhage after acute ischemic stroke patients manifests as natural progression or as a complication of treatment with potential subsequent neurological deterioration. Currently it is unclear whether these hemorrhagic transformations (HT) contribute to the poorer functional outcomes observed in patients with large infarcts. The purpose of this study is to assess the association of HT with follow-up infarct volume (FIV) and functional outcome at 90 days after AIS. Additionally, we determined whether the development of HT was associated with a diminished endovascular therapy (EVT) effect. Methods: All patients from the HERMES collaboration with follow-up imaging were included. HERMES is pooled data from seven randomized controlled trials that assessed the efficacy and safety of EVT compared to usual care. Patients with HT were identified according to the ECASS classification and FIV was assessed on CT or MRI. Infarct and hemorrhage were included in the FIV. We assessed functional outcome using the modified Rankin Scale 90 days after stroke onset. Ordinal logistic regression with adjustment for potential confounders was used to determine the association of HT and FIV with functional outcome. Results: Of all included patients with follow-up imaging (n=1665), 42% had HT (n=698). Before and after adjustment for confounders HT and FIV were associated with a shift in the direction of poorer functional outcome (aOR:0.71,95%CI:0.58-0.86 and aOR:0.99,95%CI:0.99-0.99). EVT was beneficial in patients with and without HT, but effect was greater in patients without (aOR:1.70,95%CI:1.27-2.28 vs. aOR:2.51,95%CI:1.97-3.20)(figure 1.) Conclusions: In this analysis, patients with HT after AIS were less likely to have good functional outcome compared to those without HT, independent of the FIV. While the EVT effect was slightly diminished in patients who developed HT, EVT was always of significant benefit.

Background: Intravenous (IV) administration of heparin during endovascular treatment (EVT) for ischemic stroke may improve functional outcome. However, the risks and benefits of this adjunctive therapy remain uncertain. We aimed to evaluate the use of periprocedural IV heparin in Dutch stroke intervention centers, and to assess its efficacy and safety. Methods: Patients registered between March 2014 and June 2016 in the MR CLEAN Registry, including all patients treated with EVT in the Netherlands, were analyzed. We quantified between-center variation and used multilevel logistic and ordinal regression analysis to compare patients treated with and without periprocedural IV heparin, adjusted for center-effects, prognostic factors and time. The primary outcome was functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale) at 90-days. Secondary outcomes were successful recanalization (extended thrombolysis in cerebral infarction ≥ 2B), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) and mortality at 90-days. To account for possible unobserved confounding by indication we also analyzed the effect of center-preference to administer heparin, defined as percentage of patients treated with heparin in a center, on outcome. Results: A total of 1488 patients from 16 centers were analyzed, of which 398 (27%) patients received IV heparin (median dose 5000 IU). There was substantial between-center variability in heparin use (range: 0%-94%). Analysis at center-level showed that functional outcomes were better in centers with higher percentages of heparin administration (acOR 1.07 per 10% more heparin, 95% CI 1.01-1.13). However, there was no significant difference in functional outcome between patients actually treated with and without IV heparin (adjusted common odds ratio (acOR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88-1.56), successful recanalization (aOR 1.21, 95% CI 0.87-1.68), sICH (6% vs. 6%; aOR 1.10, 95% CI 0.63-1.94) and mortality (aOR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65-1.35). Conclusion: Among patients treated with EVT, substantial between-center variability exists in periprocedural IV heparin use. Periprocedural IV heparin use seems a safe adjunctive therapy to EVT. A randomized trial is needed to to assess the effects of periprocedural IV heparin .

Background: The 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) is the most commonly used primary outcome measure in stroke treatment trials, but has drawbacks, including the potential loss of subjects due to prolonged follow-up. An alternative may be the NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) early after stroke, which is frequently used as a secondary outcome measure. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the NIHSS assessed within one week after trial inclusion could serve as a primary outcome measure for trials of acute ischaemic stroke treatment. Methods: We used the Prentice criteria to evaluate NIHSS 1 day and 5-7 days after trial inclusion as primary outcome measures in two trials of endovascular treatment (EVT): the positive MR CLEAN and the neutral IMS III. The four Prentice criteria evaluate a surrogate endpoint against a true endpoint (Figure). We adjusted for age, baseline NIHSS, collateral score, and time of symptom onset to randomization. Results: The Prentice criteria were met for NIHSS at 1 day and 5-7 days in MR CLEAN (n=500). We found a significant treatment effect of EVT on the mRS and on the NIHSS at 1 day and 5-7 days. After adjustment for NIHSS at 1 day and 5-7 days, the effect of EVT on mRS decreased from common odds ratio 1·69 (95%CI: 1·22-2·33) to respectively 1·33 (95%CI: 0·95-1·85) and 1·21 (95%CI: 0·86-1·72). In IMS III (n=656) there was no treatment effect on NIHSS at 1 day (p=0.56) and 5-7 days (p=0.28), coinciding with the absence of a treatment effect on mRS. Conclusion: NIHSS is able to replace the mRS at 90 days as a measure of treatment effect. NIHSS within one week after trial inclusion may be used as a primary outcome measure in trials of acute ischemic stroke treatment, particularly in phase II(b) trials. This could minimize loss to follow-up, and reduce trial duration and costs.

Background: Even when the revascularization and clinical status of a patient after endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke is known, outcome is still highly variable and difficult to predict. We aimed to develop and externally validate a prognostic model that can be applied within one day after EVT to predict functional outcome at three months (MR PREDICTS@24H). Methods: For model development we used data from patients in the treatment arms of seven randomized controlled trials within the HERMES collaboration. For external validation we used data from the MR CLEAN Registry, a Dutch ongoing prospective multicenter study for consecutive patients treated with EVT between March 2014 and June 2016 (n=1526). Primary outcome was the ordinal modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score three months after EVT. Eighteen pre- and post-procedural variables, assessed within one day after EVT, were analyzed with univariable ordinal logistic regression analysis (p Results: The final model included nine variables: age, baseline stroke severity measured with the NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS), diabetes mellitus, pre-stroke mRS, collateral score, occlusion location, revascularization grade, NIHSS 24 hours after EVT, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. The model explained 62% of the variance in outcome and NIHSS 24 hours after EVT was the strongest predictor with 54% explained variance. The externally validated c-statistic was 0.84 for the prediction of the ordinal mRS and 0.91 for mRS 0-2, indicating very good model performance. Calibration for mRS 0-2 was also very good (intercept: 0.25 and slope: 0.99). Conclusion: MR PREDICTS@24H, which can be applied within one day after EVT, accurately predicts functional outcome at three months. It may provide physicians, patients, and family members with improved outcome expectations and could guide physicians in personalizing their patients’ treatment and rehabilitation plans.