Search

Background and Objectives: Given the paucity of high-quality safety/efficacy data on acute stroke therapies in patients with premorbid disability, they risk being routinely excluded from such therapies. We examined utilization of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT), associated workflow, and poststroke outcomes among patients with vs without premorbid disability., Methods: We used national registry data on thrombolysis/EVT for the Czech Republic from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2020. Premorbid disability was defined as prestroke modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) ≥3. We compared proportions of patients with vs without premorbid disability who received EVT and examined workflow times. We compared ΔmRS-change in mRS from prestroke to 3 months-in patients with vs without premorbid disability, in addition to intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), mortality, and discharge NIHSS (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score), adjusting for age, sex, baseline NIHSS, and comorbidities, and verified using propensity score weighting (PSW) and matching for differences in treatment assignment. We stratified by age group (<65, 65-74, 75-84, ≥85 years) to explore outcome heterogeneity with vs without premorbid disability., Results: Among 22,405 patients with ischemic stroke who received thrombolysis/EVT/both, 1,712 (7.6%) had prestroke mRS ≥ 3. Patients with prestroke disability were less likely to receive EVT vs those without (10.1% vs 20.7%, aOR: 0.30, 95% CI 0.24-0.36). When treated, they had longer door-to-arterial puncture times (median: 75 minutes, IQR: 58-100 vs 54, IQR: 27-77, adjusted difference: 12.5, 95% CI 2.68-22.3). Patients with prestroke disability receiving thrombolysis/EVT/both had worse ΔmRS (adjusted rate ratio, aIRR on PSW: 1.57, 95% CI 1.43-1.72), rates of 3-month mRS 5-6, discharge NIHSS, and mortality (aOR-PSW [mortality]: 2.54, 95% CI 1.92-3.34), while ICH did not significantly differ. 32.1% of patients with prestroke disability receiving thrombolysis/EVT/both successfully returned to prestroke state, but this proportion ranged from 19.6% for those older than 85 years to 66.0% for those younger than 65 years. Regardless of premorbid disability, EVT was associated with better outcomes including lower ΔmRS (aIRR-PSW: 0.87, 95% CI 0.83-0.91) and mortality, with no interaction of treatment effect by premorbid disability status (e.g., mortality p interaction = 0.73). EVT recipients with premorbid disability did not differ significantly for several outcomes including ΔmRS (aIRR: 0.99, 95% CI 0.84-1.17) but were more likely to have 3-month mRS 5-6 (70.1% vs 39.5% without premorbid disability, aOR: 1.85, 95% CI 1.12-3.04)., Discussion: Patients with premorbid disability were less likely to receive EVT, had slower treatment times, and had worse outcomes compared with patients without premorbid disability. However, regardless of premorbid disability, patients fared better with EVT vs medical management and one-third with prestroke disability returned to their prestroke status., Competing Interests: O. Volny and R. Mikulik report a financial support from the STROCZECH research infrastructure within the CZECRIN Large Research Infrastructure (No. LM2023049), funded by the state budget of the Czech Republic. O. Volny reports a research support from the University Ostrava—The Rector's Award 2022 for young academic researchers aged younger than 35 and The Quality assurance frameworks for health services and patient safety based on systematic support for data-driven and informed decision-making relevant to published work. M.D. Hill reports research funding from the NoNO Inc., Medtronic LLC, Boehringer-Ingelheim Canada, and Biogen Inc.—all outside the scope of the published work. A. Ganesh reports salary support from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada New Investigator Award relevant to the published work. He also reports membership in the editorial boards of Stroke, Neurology, and Neurology Clinical Practice; consulting fees and honoraria from Atheneum, AlphaSights, MD Analytics, Figure 1, MyMedicalPanel, Creative Research Designs, CTC Communications Corp, Alexion, Biogen, and Servier Canada; research support from Alberta Innovates, the Alzheimer Society of Canada, Campus Alberta Neuroscience, Brain Canada, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society, Panmure House, the Government of Canada INOVAIT and New Frontiers in Research Fund programs, and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; stock/stock options from SnapDx and Let's Get Proof (Collavidence Inc); and a patent application for a system for patient monitoring and cuff-based therapies—all outside the scope of the published work. The other authors report no disclosures relevant to this manuscript. Full disclosure form information provided by the authors is available with the full text of this article at Neurology.org/cp., (© 2024 American Academy of Neurology.)

Objective: To undertake an effectiveness and safety analysis of EVT in patients with LVO and NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score ≤6 using datasets of multicenter and multinational nature., Methods: We pooled patients with anterior circulation occlusion from 3 prospective international cohorts. Patients were eligible if presentation occurred within 12 hours from last known well and baseline NIHSS ≤6. Primary outcome was modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 0-1 at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included neurologic deterioration at 24 hours (change in NIHSS of ≥2 points), mRS 0-2 at 90 days, and 90-day all-cause mortality. We used propensity score matching to adjust for nonrandomized treatment allocation., Results: Among 236 patients who fit inclusion criteria, 139 received EVT and 97 received medical management. Compared to medical management, the EVT group was younger (65 vs 72 years; p < 0.001), had more proximal occlusions ( p < 0.001), and less frequently received concurrent IV thrombolysis (57.7% vs 71.2%; p = 0.04). After propensity score matching, clinical outcomes between the 2 groups were not significantly different. EVT patients had an 8.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] -8.8% to 26.1%) higher rate of excellent 90-day outcome, despite a 22.3% (95% CI, 3.0%-41.6%) higher risk of neurologic deterioration at 24 hours., Conclusions: EVT for LVO in patients with low NIHSS score was associated with increased risk of neurologic deterioration at 24 hours. However, both EVT and medical management resulted in similar proportions of excellent clinical outcomes at 90 days., Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class III evidence that for patients with acute anterior circulation ischemic strokes and LVO with NIHSS < 6, EVT and medical management result in similar outcomes at 90 days., (© 2020 American Academy of Neurology.)

Background and Purpose- Posterior circulation stroke (PCS) accounts for 5% to 19% of patients with acute stroke receiving intravenous thrombolysis. We aimed to compare safety and outcomes following intravenous thrombolysis between patients with PCS and anterior circulation stroke (ACS) and incorporate the results in a meta-analysis. Methods- We included patients in the Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke Thrombolysis Registry 2013 to 2017 with computed tomography/magnetic resonance angiographic occlusion data. Outcomes were parenchymal hematoma, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH) per SITS-MOST (Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis in Stroke Monitoring Study), ECASS II (Second European Co-operative Stroke Study) and NINDS (Neurological Disorders and Stroke definition), 3-month modified Rankin Scale score, and death. Adjustment for SICH risk factors (age, sex, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, blood pressure, glucose, and atrial fibrillation) and center was done using inverse probability treatment weighting, after which an average treatment effect (ATE) was calculated. Meta-analysis of 13 studies comparing outcomes in PCS versus ACS after intravenous thrombolysis was conducted. Results- Of 5146 patients, 753 had PCS (14.6%). Patients with PCS had lower median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale: 7 (interquartile range, 4-13) versus 13 (7-18), P <0.001 and fewer cerebrovascular risk factors. In patients with PCS versus ACS, parenchymal hematoma occurred in 3.2% versus 7.9%, ATE (95% CI): -4.7% (-6.3% to 3.0%); SICH SITS-MOST in 0.6% versus 1.9%, ATE: -1.4% (-2.2% to -0.7%); SICH NINDS in 3.1% versus 7.8%, ATE: -3.0% (-6.3% to 0.3%); SICH ECASS II in 1.8% versus 5.4%, ATE: -2.3% (-5.3% to 0.7%). In PCS versus ACS, 3-month outcomes (70% data availability) were death 18.5% versus 20.5%, ATE: 6.0% (0.7%-11.4%); modified Rankin Scale score 0-1, 45.2% versus 37.5%, ATE: 1.7% (-6.6% to 3.2%); modified Rankin Scale score 0-2, 61.3% versus 49.4%, ATE: 2.4% (3.1%-7.9%). Meta-analysis showed relative risk for SICH in PCS versus ACS being 0.49 (95% CI, 0.32-0.75). Conclusions- The risk of bleeding complications after intravenous thrombolysis in PCS was half that of ACS, with similar functional outcomes and higher risk of death, acknowledging limitations of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale for stroke severity or infarct size adjustment.

Background and Purpose- There are limited data on intravenous thrombolysis treatment in patients with ischemic stroke who have received prophylactic doses of low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs). We aimed to evaluate the safety and outcomes of intravenous thrombolysis treatment in stroke patients taking thromboprophylactic doses of LMWH. Methods- We analyzed 109 291patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis, recorded in the Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke International Thrombolysis Register between 2003 and 2017 not taking oral anticoagulants or therapeutic doses of heparin at stroke onset. One thousand four hundred eleven patients (1.3%) were on prophylactic LMWH for deep venous thrombosis prevention. Outcome measures were symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, parenchymal hematoma, death within 7 days and 3 months, and functional dependency at 3 months. Results- Patients on LMWH were older, had more severe strokes, more prestroke disability, and comorbidities than patients without LMWH. There was no significant increase in adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (aOR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.48-2.17] as per Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke -MOST, aOR, 0.95 [0.59-1.53] per ECASS II]), nor for 7-day mortality (aOR, 1.14 [0.82-1.59]), in the prophylactic LMWH group. The LMWH group had a higher aOR for 3-month mortality (aOR, 1.94 [1.49-2.53]) and functional dependency, aOR, 1.44 (1.10-1.90). Propensity score analysis matching patients on baseline characteristics removed differences between groups on all outcomes except 3-month mortality. Conclusions- Intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke on treatment with prophylactic doses of LMWH at stroke onset is not associated with an increased risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage or early death.