Detection of myocardial scar from the VCG using a supervised learning approach

This paper addresses the possibility of detecting presence of scar tissue in the myocardium through the in- vestigation of vectorcardiogram (VCG) characteristics. Scarred myocardium is the result of myocardial infarction (MI) due to ischemia and creates a substrate for the manifestation of fatal arrhythmias. Our efforts are focused on the development of a classification scheme for the early screening of patients for the presence of scar. More specifically, a supervised learning model based on the extracted VCG features is proposed and validated through comprehensive testing analysis. The achieved accuracy of 82.36% (sensitivity 84.31%, specificity 77.36%) indicates the potential of the proposed screening mechanism for detecting the presence/absence of scar tissue

On the detection of myocardial scar based on ECG/VCG analysis

In this paper, we address the problem of detecting the presence of myocardial scar from standard ECG/VCG recordings, giving effort to develop a screening system for the early detection of scar in the point-of-care. Based on the pathophysiological implications of scarred myocardium, which results in disordered electrical conduction, we have implemented four distinct ECG signal processing methodologies in order to obtain a set of features that can capture the presence of myocardial scar. Two of these methodologies: a.) the use of a template ECG heartbeat, from records with scar absence coupled with Wavelet coherence analysis and b.) the utilization of the VCG are novel approaches for detecting scar presence. Following, the pool of extracted features is utilized to formulate an SVM classification model through supervised learning. Feature selection is also employed to remove redundant features and maximize the classifier's performance. Classification experiments using 260 records from three different databases reveal that the proposed system achieves 89.22% accuracy when applying 10- fold cross validation, and 82.07% success rate when testing it on databases with different inherent characteristics with similar levels of sensitivity (76%) and specificity (87.5%)

Effects of antiplatelet therapy on stroke risk by brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases: subgroup analyses of the RESTART randomised, open-label trial

Background Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy

Tenecteplase versus alteplase for acute stroke within 4·5 h of onset (ATTEST-2): a randomised, parallel group, open-label trial

Background: Tenecteplase has potential benefits over alteplase, the standard agent for intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischaemic stroke, because it is administered as a single bolus and might have superior efficacy. The ATTEST-2 trial investigated whether tenecteplase was non-inferior or superior to alteplase within 4·5 h of onset. Methods: We undertook a prospective, randomised, parallel-group, open-label trial with masked endpoint evaluation in 39 UK stroke centres. Previously independent adults with acute ischaemic stroke, eligible for intravenous thrombolysis less than 4·5 h from last known well, were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive intravenous alteplase 0·9 mg/kg or tenecteplase 0·25 mg/kg, by use of a telephone-based interactive voice response system. The primary endpoint was the distribution of the day 90 modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score and was analysed using ordinal logistic regression in the modified intention-to-treat population. We tested the primary outcome for non-inferiority (odds ratio for tenecteplase vs alteplase non-inferiority limit of 0·75), and for superiority if non-inferiority was confirmed. Safety outcomes were mortality, symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, radiological intracranial haemorrhage, and major extracranial bleeding. The trial was prospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02814409). Findings: Between Jan 25, 2017, and May 30, 2023, 1858 patients were randomly assigned to a treatment group, of whom 1777 received thrombolytic treatment and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population (n=885 allocated tenecteplase and n=892 allocated alteplase). The mean age of participants was 70·4 (SD 12·9) years and median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale was 7 (IQR 5–13) at baseline. Tenecteplase was non-inferior to alteplase for mRS score distribution at 90 days, but was not superior (odds ratio 1·07; 95% CI 0·90–1·27; p value for non-inferiority<0·0001; p=0·43 for superiority). 68 (8%) patients in the tenecteplase group compared with 75 (8%) patients in the alteplase group died, symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage (defined by SITS-MOST criteria) occurred in 20 (2%) versus 15 (2%) patients, parenchymal haematoma type 2 occurred in 37 (4%) versus 26 (3%) patients, post-treatment intracranial bleed occurred in 94 (11%) versus 78 (9%) patients, significant extracranial haemorrhage occurred in 13 (1%) versus six (1%) patients, respectively, and angioedema occurred in six (1%) participants in both groups. Interpretation: Tenecteplase 0·25 mg/kg was non-inferior to 0·9 mg/kg alteplase within 4·5 h of symptom onset in acute ischaemic stroke. Easier administration of tenecteplase, especially in the context of interhospital transfers, indicates that tenecteplase should be preferred to alteplase for thrombolysis in acute ischaemic stroke. The ATTEST-2 population was large and representative of thrombolysis-eligible patients in the UK and, together with findings from other trials, provides robust evidence supporting the introduction of tenecteplase in preference to alteplase

Tenecteplase versus alteplase for acute stroke within 4·5 h of onset (ATTEST-2): a randomised, parallel group, open-label trial

Background: Tenecteplase has potential benefits over alteplase, the standard agent for intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischaemic stroke, because it is administered as a single bolus and might have superior efficacy. The ATTEST-2 trial investigated whether tenecteplase was non-inferior or superior to alteplase within 4·5 h of onset. Methods: We undertook a prospective, randomised, parallel-group, open-label trial with masked endpoint evaluation in 39 UK stroke centres. Previously independent adults with acute ischaemic stroke, eligible for intravenous thrombolysis less than 4·5 h from last known well, were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive intravenous alteplase 0·9 mg/kg or tenecteplase 0·25 mg/kg, by use of a telephone-based interactive voice response system. The primary endpoint was the distribution of the day 90 modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score and was analysed using ordinal logistic regression in the modified intention-to-treat population. We tested the primary outcome for non-inferiority (odds ratio for tenecteplase vs alteplase non-inferiority limit of 0·75), and for superiority if non-inferiority was confirmed. Safety outcomes were mortality, symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, radiological intracranial haemorrhage, and major extracranial bleeding. The trial was prospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02814409). Findings: Between Jan 25, 2017, and May 30, 2023, 1858 patients were randomly assigned to a treatment group, of whom 1777 received thrombolytic treatment and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population (n=885 allocated tenecteplase and n=892 allocated alteplase). The mean age of participants was 70·4 (SD 12·9) years and median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale was 7 (IQR 5–13) at baseline. Tenecteplase was non-inferior to alteplase for mRS score distribution at 90 days, but was not superior (odds ratio 1·07; 95% CI 0·90–1·27; p value for non-inferiority<0·0001; p=0·43 for superiority). 68 (8%) patients in the tenecteplase group compared with 75 (8%) patients in the alteplase group died, symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage (defined by SITS-MOST criteria) occurred in 20 (2%) versus 15 (2%) patients, parenchymal haematoma type 2 occurred in 37 (4%) versus 26 (3%) patients, post-treatment intracranial bleed occurred in 94 (11%) versus 78 (9%) patients, significant extracranial haemorrhage occurred in 13 (1%) versus six (1%) patients, respectively, and angioedema occurred in six (1%) participants in both groups. Interpretation: Tenecteplase 0·25 mg/kg was non-inferior to 0·9 mg/kg alteplase within 4·5 h of symptom onset in acute ischaemic stroke. Easier administration of tenecteplase, especially in the context of interhospital transfers, indicates that tenecteplase should be preferred to alteplase for thrombolysis in acute ischaemic stroke. The ATTEST-2 population was large and representative of thrombolysis-eligible patients in the UK and, together with findings from other trials, provides robust evidence supporting the introduction of tenecteplase in preference to alteplase. Funding: The Stroke Association and British Heart Foundation

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention

Global, regional, and national burden of traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury, 1990–2016: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license Background: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and spinal cord injury (SCI) are increasingly recognised as global health priorities in view of the preventability of most injuries and the complex and expensive medical care they necessitate. We aimed to measure the incidence, prevalence, and years of life lived with disability (YLDs) for TBI and SCI from all causes of injury in every country, to describe how these measures have changed between 1990 and 2016, and to estimate the proportion of TBI and SCI cases caused by different types of injury. Methods: We used results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) Study 2016 to measure the global, regional, and national burden of TBI and SCI by age and sex. We measured the incidence and prevalence of all causes of injury requiring medical care in inpatient and outpatient records, literature studies, and survey data. By use of clinical record data, we estimated the proportion of each cause of injury that required medical care that would result in TBI or SCI being considered as the nature of injury. We used literature studies to establish standardised mortality ratios and applied differential equations to convert incidence to prevalence of long-term disability. Finally, we applied GBD disability weights to calculate YLDs. We used a Bayesian meta-regression tool for epidemiological modelling, used cause-specific mortality rates for non-fatal estimation, and adjusted our results for disability experienced with comorbid conditions. We also analysed results on the basis of the Socio-demographic Index, a compound measure of income per capita, education, and fertility. Findings: In 2016, there were 27·08 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 24·30–30·30 million) new cases of TBI and 0·93 million (0·78–1·16 million) new cases of SCI, with age-standardised incidence rates of 369 (331–412) per 100 000 population for TBI and 13 (11–16) per 100 000 for SCI. In 2016, the number of prevalent cases of TBI was 55·50 million (53·40–57·62 million) and of SCI was 27·04 million (24·98–30·15 million). From 1990 to 2016, the age-standardised prevalence of TBI increased by 8·4% (95% UI 7·7 to 9·2), whereas that of SCI did not change significantly (−0·2% [–2·1 to 2·7]). Age-standardised incidence rates increased by 3·6% (1·8 to 5·5) for TBI, but did not change significantly for SCI (−3·6% [–7·4 to 4·0]). TBI caused 8·1 million (95% UI 6·0–10·4 million) YLDs and SCI caused 9·5 million (6·7–12·4 million) YLDs in 2016, corresponding to age-standardised rates of 111 (82–141) per 100 000 for TBI and 130 (90–170) per 100 000 for SCI. Falls and road injuries were the leading causes of new cases of TBI and SCI in most regions. Interpretation: TBI and SCI constitute a considerable portion of the global injury burden and are caused primarily by falls and road injuries. The increase in incidence of TBI over time might continue in view of increases in population density, population ageing, and increasing use of motor vehicles, motorcycles, and bicycles. The number of individuals living with SCI is expected to increase in view of population growth, which is concerning because of the specialised care that people with SCI can require. Our study was limited by data sparsity in some regions, and it will be important to invest greater resources in collection of data for TBI and SCI to improve the accuracy of future assessments. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P &lt; 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely