Regional, sex, and age differences in diagnostic testing among participants in the NAVIGATE-ESUS trial

Background and aim: The diagnosis of embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) is based on excluding other more likely stroke etiologies, and therefore diagnostic testing plays an especially crucial role. Our objective was to compare the diagnostic testing by region, sex, and age among the participants of NAVIGATE-ESUS trial. Methods: Participants were grouped according to five global regions (North America, Latin America, Western Europe, Eastern Europe and East Asia), age (<60, 60–74, and >75 years), and sex. Frequencies of each diagnostic test within areas of echocardiography, cardiac rhythm monitoring, and arterial imaging were described and compared across groups. A multivariable logistic regression model for each diagnostic test was fit to assess the independent influence of each of region, age, and sex and likelihood of testing. Results: We included 6985 patients in the analysis (918 from North America; 746 from Latin America; 2853 from Western Europe; 1118 from Eastern Europe; 1350 from East Asia). Average age (highest in Western Europe (69 years), lowest in Eastern Europe (65 years)), % females (highest in Latin America (44%) and lowest in East Asia (31%)), and use of each diagnostic test varied significantly across regions. Region, but not sex, was independently associated with use of each diagnostic test examined. Transesophageal echocardiography and either CT or MR angiogram were more often used in younger patients. Conclusion: Diagnostic testing differed by region, and less frequently by age, but not by sex. Our findings reflect the existing variations in global practice in diagnostic testing in ESUS patients

Embolic strokes of undetermined source: prevalence and patient features in the ESUS Global Registry

Background: Recent evidence supports that most non-lacunar cryptogenic strokes are embolic. Accordingly, these strokes have been designated as embolic strokes of undetermined source (ESUS). Aims: We undertook an international survey to characterize the frequency and clinical features of ESUS patients across global regions. Methods: Consecutive patients hospitalized for ischemic stroke were retrospectively surveyed from 19 stroke research centers in 19 different countries to collect patients meeting criteria for ESUS. Results: Of 2144 patients with recent ischemic stroke, 351 (16%, 95% CI 15% to 18%) met ESUS criteria, similar across global regions (range 16% to 21%), and an additional 308 (14%) patients had incomplete evaluation required for ESUS diagnosis. The mean age of ESUS patients (62 years; SD = 15) was significantly lower than the 1793 non-ESUS ischemic stroke patients (68 years, p ≤ 0.001). Excluding patients with atrial fibrillation (n = 590, mean age = 75 years), the mean age of the remaining 1203 non-ESUS ischemic stroke patients was 64 years (p = 0.02 vs. ESUS patients). Among ESUS patients, hypertension, diabetes, and prior stroke were present in 64%, 25%, and 17%, respectively. Median NIHSS score was 4 (interquartile range 2–8). At discharge, 90% of ESUS patients received antiplatelet therapy and 7% received anticoagulation. Conclusions: This cross-sectional global sample of patients with recent ischemic stroke shows that one-sixth met criteria for ESUS, with additional ESUS patients likely among those with incomplete diagnostic investigation. ESUS patients were relatively young with mild strokes. Antiplatelet therapy was the standard antithrombotic therapy for secondary stroke prevention in all global regions

Characteristics of Recurrent Ischemic Stroke after Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: The concept of embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) unifies a subgroup of cryptogenic strokes based on neuroimaging, a defined minimum set of diagnostic tests, and exclusion of certain causes. Despite an annual stroke recurrence rate of 5%, little is known about the etiology underlying recurrent stroke after ESUS. Objective: To identify the stroke subtype of recurrent ischemic strokes after ESUS, to explore the interaction with treatment assignment in each category, and to examine the consistency of cerebral location of qualifying ESUS and recurrent ischemic stroke. Design, Setting, and Participants: The NAVIGATE-ESUS trial was a randomized clinical trial conducted from December 23, 2014, to October 5, 2017. The trial compared the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban and aspirin in patients with recent ESUS (n = 7213). Ischemic stroke was validated in 309 of the 7213 patients by adjudicators blinded to treatment assignment and classified by local investigators into the categories ESUS or non-ESUS (ie, cardioembolic, atherosclerotic, lacunar, other determined cause, or insufficient testing). Five patients with recurrent strokes that could not be defined as ischemic or hemorrhagic in absence of neuroimaging or autopsy were excluded. Data for this secondary post hoc analysis were analyzed from March to June 2019. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to receive rivaroxaban, 15 mg/d, or aspirin, 100 mg/d. Main Outcomes and Measures: Association of recurrent ESUS with stroke characteristics. Results: A total of 309 patients (205 men [66%]; mean [SD] age, 68 [10] years) had ischemic stroke identified during the median follow-up of 11 (interquartile range [IQR], 12) months (annualized rate, 4.6%). Diagnostic testing was insufficient for etiological classification in 39 patients (13%). Of 270 classifiable ischemic strokes, 156 (58%) were ESUS and 114 (42%) were non-ESUS (37 [32%] cardioembolic, 26 [23%] atherosclerotic, 35 [31%] lacunar, and 16 [14%] other determined cause). Atrial fibrillation was found in 27 patients (9%) with recurrent ischemic stroke and was associated with higher morbidity (median change in modified Rankin scale score 2 [IQR, 3] vs 0 (IQR, 1]) and mortality (15% vs 1%) than other causes. Risk of recurrence did not differ significantly by subtype between treatment groups. For both the qualifying and recurrent strokes, location of infarct was more often in the left (46% and 54%, respectively) than right hemisphere (40% and 37%, respectively) or brainstem or cerebellum (14% and 9%, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of randomized clinical trial data, most recurrent strokes after ESUS were embolic and of undetermined source. Recurrences associated with atrial fibrillation were a minority but were more often disabling and fatal. More extensive investigation to identify the embolic source is important toward an effective antithrombotic strategy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02313909

Risk of intracranial haemorrhage and ischaemic stroke after convexity subarachnoid haemorrhage in cerebral amyloid angiopathy: international individual patient data pooled analysis

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the frequency, time-course and predictors of intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH), recurrent convexity subarachnoid haemorrhage (cSAH), and ischemic stroke after cSAH associated with cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA). METHODS: We performed a systematic review and international individual patient-data pooled analysis in patients with cSAH associated with probable or possible CAA diagnosed on baseline MRI using the modified Boston criteria. We used Cox proportional hazards models with a frailty term to account for between-cohort differences. RESULTS: We included 190 patients (mean age 74.5 years; 45.3% female) from 13 centers with 385 patient-years of follow-up (median 1.4 years). The risks of each outcome (per patient-year) were: ICH 13.2% (95% CI 9.9-17.4); recurrent cSAH 11.1% (95% CI 7.9-15.2); combined ICH, cSAH, or both 21.4% (95% CI 16.7-26.9), ischemic stroke 5.1% (95% CI 3.1-8) and death 8.3% (95% CI 5.6-11.8). In multivariable models, there is evidence that patients with probable CAA (compared to possible CAA) had a higher risk of ICH (HR 8.45, 95% CI 1.13-75.5, p = 0.02) and cSAH (HR 3.66, 95% CI 0.84-15.9, p = 0.08) but not ischemic stroke (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.17-1.82, p = 0.33) or mortality (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.16-1.78, p = 0.31). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cSAH associated with probable or possible CAA have high risk of future ICH and recurrent cSAH. Convexity SAH associated with probable (vs possible) CAA is associated with increased risk of ICH, and cSAH but not ischemic stroke. Our data provide precise risk estimates for key vascular events after cSAH associated with CAA which can inform management decisions

Characterization of patients with embolic strokes of undetermined source in the NAVIGATE ESUS randomized trial

Background: The New Approach Rivaroxaban Inhibition of Factor Xa in a Global Trial vs. ASA to Prevent Embolism in Embolic Stroke of Undetermined Source (NAVIGATE-ESUS) trial is a randomized phase-III trial comparing rivaroxaban versus aspirin in patients with recent ESUS. Aims: We aimed to describe the baseline characteristics of this large ESUS cohort to explore relationships among key subgroups. Methods: We enrolled 7213 patients at 459 sites in 31 countries. Prespecified subgroups for primary safety and efficacy analyses included age, sex, race, global region, stroke or transient ischemic attack prior to qualifying event, time to randomization, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus. Results: Mean age was 66.9 ± 9.8 years; 24% were under 60 years. Older patients had more hypertension, coronary disease, and cancer. Strokes in older subjects were more frequently cortical and accompanied by radiographic evidence of prior infarction. Women comprised 38% of participants and were older than men. Patients from East Asia were oldest whereas those from Latin America were youngest. Patients in the Americas more frequently were on aspirin prior to the qualifying stroke. Acute cortical infarction was more common in the United States, Canada, and Western Europe, whereas prior radiographic infarctions were most common in East Asia. Approximately forty-five percent of subjects were enrolled within 30 days of the qualifying stroke, with earliest enrollments in Asia and Eastern Europe. Conclusions: NAVIGATE-ESUS is the largest randomized trial comparing antithrombotic strategies for secondary stroke prevention in patients with ESUS. The study population encompasses a broad array of patients across multiple continents and these subgroups provide ample opportunities for future research

Rivaroxaban or aspirin for patent foramen ovale and embolic stroke of undetermined source: a prespecified subgroup analysis from the NAVIGATE ESUS trial

Background: Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is a contributor to embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS). Subgroup analyses from prior studies suggest that anticoagulation could reduce recurrent stroke compared with antiplatelet therapy. We hypothesized that anticoagulant treatment with rivaroxaban, an oral factor-Xa inhibitor, would reduce the risk of recurrent stroke compared with aspirin among patients with PFO enrolled in the NAVIGATE-ESUS trial. Methods: The NAVIGATE-ESUS double-blind, randomised trial assessed the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban 15mg versus aspirin 100mg once daily for secondary stroke prevention in patients with ESUS. For this prespecified subgroup analysis, cohorts with and without PFO were defined based on transthoracic(TTE) and transesophageal echocardiography(TEE). The primary efficacy outcome was time-to-recurrent ischemic stroke between treatment groups. In addition, a systematic review of the literature incorporated prior studies in which patients with cryptogenic stroke and PFO were randomly assigned to anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy. Findings: 7213 participants were enrolled and followed for a mean of 11 months due to early trial termination. PFO was reported as present in 534 (7.4%) patients based on either TTE or TEE. Aspirinassigned patients with PFO had a recurrent stroke rate of 4.8% per year. Among patients with known PFO, there was insufficient evidence to support a difference in hazards between rivaroxaban and aspirin (HR 0.54; 95%CI:0.22-1.36), while hazards were high similar for those without known PFO (HR 1.06; 95%CI:0.84-1.33); the interaction was not statistically significant (p=0.18). Major bleeding was likely increased with rivaroxaban compared with aspirin (HR 2.05; 95%CI:0.51-8.2) in patients with PFO. Systematic review that included 2 prior trials yielded a summary odds ratio of 0.48 (95%CI:0.24-0.96; p=0.04) in favour of anticoagulation, without evidence of heterogeneity. Interpretation: Among patients with ESUS who have PFO, anticoagulation may reduce the risk of recurrent stroke by about half, though substantial imprecision remains. Dedicated trials of anticoagulation vs. antiplatelet therapy and/or PFO closure are warranted

The rationale and design of the antihypertensives and vascular, endothelial, and cognitive function (AVEC) trial in elderly hypertensives with early cognitive impairment: Role of the renin angiotensin system inhibition

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Prior evidence suggests that the renin angiotensin system and antihypertensives that inhibit this system play a role in cognitive, central vascular, and endothelial function. Our objective is to conduct a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial, the antihypertensives and vascular, endothelial, and cognitive function (AVEC), to compare 1 year treatment of 3 antihypertensives (lisinopril, candesartan, or hydrochlorothiazide) in their effect on memory and executive function, cerebral blood flow, and central endothelial function of seniors with hypertension and early objective evidence of executive or memory impairments.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The overall experimental design of the AVEC trial is a 3-arm double blind randomized controlled clinical trial. A total of 100 community eligible individuals (60 years or older) with hypertension and early cognitive impairment are being recruited from the greater Boston area and randomized to lisinopril, candesartan, or hydrochlorothiazide ("active control") for 12 months. The goal of the intervention is to achieve blood pressure control defined as SBP < 140 mm Hg and DBP < 90 mm Hg. Additional antihypertensives are added to achieve this goal if needed. Eligible participants are those with hypertension, defined as a blood pressure 140/90 mm Hg or greater, early cognitive impairment without dementia defined (10 or less out of 15 on the executive clock draw test or 1 standard deviation below the mean on the immediate memory subtest of the repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status and Mini-Mental-Status-exam >20 and without clinical diagnosis of dementia or Alzheimer's disease). Individuals who are currently receiving antihypertensives are eligible to participate if the participants and the primary care providers are willing to taper their antihypertensives. Participants undergo cognitive assessment, measurements of cerebral blood flow using Transcranial Doppler, and central endothelial function by measuring changes in cerebral blood flow in response to changes in end tidal carbon dioxide at baseline (off antihypertensives), 6, and 12 months. Our outcomes are change in cognitive function score (executive and memory), cerebral blood flow, and carbon dioxide cerebral vasoreactivity.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The AVEC trial is the first study to explore impact of antihypertensives in those who are showing early evidence of cognitive difficulties that did not reach the threshold of dementia. Success of this trial will offer new therapeutic application of antihypertensives that inhibit the renin angiotensin system and new insights in the role of this system in aging.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00605072</p

Rivaroxaban versus aspirin for prevention of covert brain infarcts in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source: NAVIGATE ESUS MRI substudy

Background: Covert brain infarcts are associated with important neurological morbidity. Their incidence in patients with embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) is unknown. Aims: To assess the incidence of covert brain infarcts and cerebral microbleeds using MRI in a prospective substudy of the NAVIGATE ESUS randomized trial and to evaluate the effects of antithrombotic therapies. Methods: At 87 sites in 15 countries, substudy participants were randomly assigned to receive rivaroxaban 15 mg daily or aspirin 100 mg daily and underwent brain MRI near randomization and after study termination. The primary outcome was incident brain infarct (clinical ischemic stroke or covert brain infarct). Brain infarcts and microbleeds were ascertained centrally by readers unaware of treatment. Treatment effects were estimated using logistic regression. Results: Among the 718 substudy participants with interpretable, paired MRIs, the mean age was 67 years and 61% were men with a median of 52 days between the qualifying ischemic stroke and randomization and a median of seven days between randomization and baseline MRI. During the median (IQR) 11 (12) month interval between scans, clinical ischemic strokes occurred in 27 (4%) participants, while 60 (9%) of the remaining participants had an incident covert brain infarct detected by MRI. Assignment to rivaroxaban was not associated with reduction in the incidence of brain infarct (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.49, 1.2) or of covert brain infarct among those without clinical stroke (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.50, 1.4). New microbleeds were observed in 7% and did not differ among those assigned rivaroxaban vs. aspirin (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.52–1.7). Conclusions: Incident covert brain infarcts occurred in twice as many ESUS patients as a clinical ischemic stroke. Treatment with rivaroxaban compared with aspirin did not significantly reduce the incidence of covert brain infarcts or increase the incidence of microbleeds, but the confidence intervals for treatment effects were wide. Registration: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT 02313909

Primary stroke prevention worldwide : translating evidence into action

Funding Information: The stroke services survey reported in this publication was partly supported by World Stroke Organization and Auckland University of Technology. VLF was partly supported by the grants received from the Health Research Council of New Zealand. MOO was supported by the US National Institutes of Health (SIREN U54 HG007479) under the H3Africa initiative and SIBS Genomics (R01NS107900, R01NS107900-02S1, R01NS115944-01, 3U24HG009780-03S5, and 1R01NS114045-01), Sub-Saharan Africa Conference on Stroke Conference (1R13NS115395-01A1), and Training Africans to Lead and Execute Neurological Trials & Studies (D43TW012030). AGT was supported by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. SLG was supported by a National Heart Foundation of Australia Future Leader Fellowship and an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council synergy grant. We thank Anita Arsovska (University Clinic of Neurology, Skopje, North Macedonia), Manoj Bohara (HAMS Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal), Denis ?erimagi? (Poliklinika Glavi?, Dubrovnik, Croatia), Manuel Correia (Hospital de Santo Ant?nio, Porto, Portugal), Daissy Liliana Mora Cuervo (Hospital Moinhos de Vento, Porto Alegre, Brazil), Anna Cz?onkowska (Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland), Gloria Ekeng (Stroke Care International, Dartford, UK), Jo?o Sargento-Freitas (Centro Hospitalar e Universit?rio de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal), Yuriy Flomin (MC Universal Clinic Oberig, Kyiv, Ukraine), Mehari Gebreyohanns (UT Southwestern Medical Centre, Dallas, TX, USA), Ivete Pillo Gon?alves (Hospital S?o Jos? do Avai, Itaperuna, Brazil), Claiborne Johnston (Dell Medical School, University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA), Kristaps Jurj?ns (P Stradins Clinical University Hospital, Riga, Latvia), Rizwan Kalani (University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA), Grzegorz Kozera (Medical University of Gda?sk, Gda?sk, Poland), Kursad Kutluk (Dokuz Eylul University, ?zmir, Turkey), Branko Malojcic (University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia), Micha? Maluchnik (Ministry of Health, Warsaw, Poland), Evija Migl?ne (P Stradins Clinical University Hospital, Riga, Latvia), Cassandra Ocampo (University of Botswana, Princess Marina Hospital, Botswana), Louise Shaw (Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, UK), Lekhjung Thapa (Upendra Devkota Memorial-National Institute of Neurological and Allied Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal), Bogdan Wojtyniak (National Institute of Public Health, Warsaw, Poland), Jie Yang (First Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College, Chengdu, China), and Tomasz Zdrojewski (Medical University of Gda?sk, Gda?sk, Poland) for their comments on early draft of the manuscript. The views expressed in this article are solely the responsibility of the authors and they do not necessarily reflect the views, decisions, or policies of the institution with which they are affiliated. We thank WSO for funding. The funder had no role in the design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of the study results, writing of the report, or the decision to submit the study results for publication. Funding Information: The stroke services survey reported in this publication was partly supported by World Stroke Organization and Auckland University of Technology. VLF was partly supported by the grants received from the Health Research Council of New Zealand. MOO was supported by the US National Institutes of Health (SIREN U54 HG007479) under the H3Africa initiative and SIBS Genomics (R01NS107900, R01NS107900-02S1, R01NS115944-01, 3U24HG009780-03S5, and 1R01NS114045-01), Sub-Saharan Africa Conference on Stroke Conference (1R13NS115395-01A1), and Training Africans to Lead and Execute Neurological Trials & Studies (D43TW012030). AGT was supported by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. SLG was supported by a National Heart Foundation of Australia Future Leader Fellowship and an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council synergy grant. We thank Anita Arsovska (University Clinic of Neurology, Skopje, North Macedonia), Manoj Bohara (HAMS Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal), Denis Čerimagić (Poliklinika Glavić, Dubrovnik, Croatia), Manuel Correia (Hospital de Santo António, Porto, Portugal), Daissy Liliana Mora Cuervo (Hospital Moinhos de Vento, Porto Alegre, Brazil), Anna Członkowska (Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland), Gloria Ekeng (Stroke Care International, Dartford, UK), João Sargento-Freitas (Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal), Yuriy Flomin (MC Universal Clinic Oberig, Kyiv, Ukraine), Mehari Gebreyohanns (UT Southwestern Medical Centre, Dallas, TX, USA), Ivete Pillo Gonçalves (Hospital São José do Avai, Itaperuna, Brazil), Claiborne Johnston (Dell Medical School, University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA), Kristaps Jurjāns (P Stradins Clinical University Hospital, Riga, Latvia), Rizwan Kalani (University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA), Grzegorz Kozera (Medical University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland), Kursad Kutluk (Dokuz Eylul University, İzmir, Turkey), Branko Malojcic (University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia), Michał Maluchnik (Ministry of Health, Warsaw, Poland), Evija Miglāne (P Stradins Clinical University Hospital, Riga, Latvia), Cassandra Ocampo (University of Botswana, Princess Marina Hospital, Botswana), Louise Shaw (Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, UK), Lekhjung Thapa (Upendra Devkota Memorial-National Institute of Neurological and Allied Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal), Bogdan Wojtyniak (National Institute of Public Health, Warsaw, Poland), Jie Yang (First Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College, Chengdu, China), and Tomasz Zdrojewski (Medical University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland) for their comments on early draft of the manuscript. The views expressed in this article are solely the responsibility of the authors and they do not necessarily reflect the views, decisions, or policies of the institution with which they are affiliated. We thank WSO for funding. The funder had no role in the design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of the study results, writing of the report, or the decision to submit the study results for publication. Funding Information: VLF declares that the PreventS web app and Stroke Riskometer app are owned and copyrighted by Auckland University of Technology; has received grants from the Brain Research New Zealand Centre of Research Excellence (16/STH/36), Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC; APP1182071), and World Stroke Organization (WSO); is an executive committee member of WSO, honorary medical director of Stroke Central New Zealand, and CEO of New Zealand Stroke Education charitable Trust. AGT declares funding from NHMRC (GNT1042600, GNT1122455, GNT1171966, GNT1143155, and GNT1182017), Stroke Foundation Australia (SG1807), and Heart Foundation Australia (VG102282); and board membership of the Stroke Foundation (Australia). SLG is funded by the National Health Foundation of Australia (Future Leader Fellowship 102061) and NHMRC (GNT1182071, GNT1143155, and GNT1128373). RM is supported by the Implementation Research Network in Stroke Care Quality of the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (project CA18118) and by the IRIS-TEPUS project from the inter-excellence inter-cost programme of the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic (project LTC20051). BN declares receiving fees for data management committee work for SOCRATES and THALES trials for AstraZeneca and fees for data management committee work for NAVIGATE-ESUS trial from Bayer. All other authors declare no competing interests. Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licenseStroke is the second leading cause of death and the third leading cause of disability worldwide and its burden is increasing rapidly in low-income and middle-income countries, many of which are unable to face the challenges it imposes. In this Health Policy paper on primary stroke prevention, we provide an overview of the current situation regarding primary prevention services, estimate the cost of stroke and stroke prevention, and identify deficiencies in existing guidelines and gaps in primary prevention. We also offer a set of pragmatic solutions for implementation of primary stroke prevention, with an emphasis on the role of governments and population-wide strategies, including task-shifting and sharing and health system re-engineering. Implementation of primary stroke prevention involves patients, health professionals, funders, policy makers, implementation partners, and the entire population along the life course.publishersversionPeer reviewe