Search

Background and purposeThe novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2), now named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), may change the risk of stroke through an enhanced systemic inflammatory response, hypercoagulable state, and endothelial damage in the cerebrovascular system. Moreover, due to the current pandemic, some countries have prioritized health resources towards COVID-19 management, making it more challenging to appropriately care for other potentially disabling and fatal diseases such as stroke. The aim of this study is to identify and describe changes in stroke epidemiological trends before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis is an international, multicenter, hospital-based study on stroke incidence and outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will describe patterns in stroke management, stroke hospitalization rate, and stroke severity, subtype (ischemic/hemorrhagic), and outcomes (including in-hospital mortality) in 2020 during COVID-19 pandemic, comparing them with the corresponding data from 2018 and 2019, and subsequently 2021. We will also use an interrupted time series (ITS) analysis to assess the change in stroke hospitalization rates before, during, and after COVID-19, in each participating center.ConclusionThe proposed study will potentially enable us to better understand the changes in stroke care protocols, differential hospitalization rate, and severity of stroke, as it pertains to the COVID-19 pandemic. Ultimately, this will help guide clinical-based policies surrounding COVID-19 and other similar global pandemics to ensure that management of cerebrovascular comorbidity is appropriately prioritized during the global crisis. It will also guide public health guidelines for at-risk populations to reduce risks of complications from such comorbidities.

Objective: Reperfusion therapy is highly beneficial for ischemic stroke. Reduction in both infarct growth and edema are plausible mediators of clinical benefit with reperfusion. We aimed to quantify these mediators and their interrelationship. Methods: In a pooled, patient‐level analysis of the EXTEND‐IA trials and SELECT study, we used a mediation analysis framework to quantify infarct growth and cerebral edema (midline shift) mediation effect on successful reperfusion (modified Treatment in Cerebral Ischemia ≥ 2b) association with functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale distribution). Furthermore, we evaluated an additional pathway to the original hypothesis, where infarct growth mediated successful reperfusion effect on midline shift. Results: A total 542 of 665 (81.5%) eligible patients achieved successful reperfusion. Baseline clinical and imaging characteristics were largely similar between those achieving successful versus unsuccessful reperfusion. Median infarct growth was 12.3ml (interquartile range [IQR] = 1.8–48.4), and median midline shift was 0mm (IQR = 0–2.2). Of 249 (37%) demonstrating a midline shift of ≥1mm, median shift was 2.75mm (IQR = 1.89–4.21). Successful reperfusion was associated with reductions in both predefined mediators, infarct growth (β = −1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −1.51 to −0.88, p < 0.001) and midline shift (adjusted odds ratio = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.23–0.57, p < 0.001). Successful reperfusion association with improved functional outcome (adjusted common odds ratio [acOR] = 2.68, 95% CI = 1.86–3.88, p < 0.001) became insignificant (acOR = 1.39, 95% CI = 0.95–2.04, p = 0.094) when infarct growth and midline shift were added to the regression model. Infarct growth and midline shift explained 45% and 34% of successful reperfusion effect, respectively. Analysis considering an alternative hypothesis demonstrated consistent results. Interpretation: In this mediation analysis from a pooled, patient‐level cohort, a significant proportion (~80%) of successful reperfusion effect on functional outcome was mediated through reduction in infarct growth and cerebral edema. Further studies are required to confirm our findings, detect additional mediators to explain successful reperfusion residual effect, and identify novel therapeutic targets to further enhance reperfusion benefits. ANN NEUROL 2023;93:793–804 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1552-6569.2008.00330.x Byline: Randall C. Edgell (1), Dileep R. Yavagal (1), Doniel Drazin (1), Raul Olivera (1), Alan S. Boulos (1) Keywords: Vertebral artery origin; stenosis; drug-eluting; stent; stroke Abstract: ABSTRACT BACKGROUND Vertebral artery origin stenosis is a known cause of stroke that is treatable with angioplasty and stenting. Previous studies have demonstrated that this technique is safe but is limited by high rates of in-stent stenosis. Anti-proliferative drug-eluting stents are an alternative for reducing in-stent stenosis at the vertebral artery origin. METHODS This retrospective study included five consecutive patients treated with anti-proliferative drug-eluting stents. The patients' demographics, indications for treatment, procedural technique, and clinical and radiographic follow-up are presented along with a review of the literature. RESULTS No peri-procedural complications occurred. One patient had a transient ischemic attack (TIA) during the follow-up period. No patients had hemodynamically significant (>50%) in-stent stenosis at follow-up. Among the 287 cases reported in the literature, there were two strokes (.7%), four TIAs (1.4%), and no procedurally related deaths. Among patients undergoing angiographic follow-up, 26% were found to have >50% in-stent stenosis. CONCLUSIONS Anti-proliferative drug-eluting stents hold promise for reducing in-stent stenosis at the vertebral artery origin. Author Affiliation: (1)From the Department of Surgery, Division of Neurosurgery, St. Louis University, St. Louis, MO (RCE, RO); Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, St. Louis University, St. Louis, MO (RCE); Department of Neurology, University of Miami, Miami, FL (DRY); Department of Surgery, Division of Neurosurgery, Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY (DD, ASB). Article History: Acceptance: Received September 2, 2008, and in revised from August 7, 2008. Accepted for publication September 24, 2008. Article note: Correspondence: Address correspondence to Randall C. Edgell, MD, Division of Neurosurgery, 3635 Vista Avenue at Grand, St. Louis, MO 63110. E-mail: randall.edgell@gmail.com