Risk of stroke in hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 infected patients: A multinational study

Background: There is an increased attention to stroke following SARS-CoV-2. The goal of this study was to better depict the short-term risk of stroke and its associated factors among SARS-CoV-2 hospitalized patients. Methods: This multicentre, multinational observational study includes hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 patients from North and South America (United States, Canada, and Brazil), Europe (Greece, Italy, Finland, and Turkey), Asia (Lebanon, Iran, and India), and Oceania (New Zealand). The outcome was the risk of subsequent stroke. Centres were included by non-probability sampling. The counts and clinical characteristics including laboratory findings and imaging of the patients with and without a subsequent stroke were recorded according to a predefined protocol. Quality, risk of bias, and heterogeneity assessments were conducted according to ROBINS-E and Cochrane Q-test. The risk of subsequent stroke was estimated through meta-analyses with random effect models. Bivariate logistic regression was used to determine the parameters with predictive outcome value. The study was reported according to the STROBE, MOOSE, and EQUATOR guidelines. Findings: We received data from 26,175 hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 patients from 99 tertiary centres in 65 regions of 11 countries until May 1st, 2020. A total of 17,799 patients were included in meta-analyses. Among them, 156(0.9) patients had a stroke�123(79) ischaemic stroke, 27(17) intracerebral/subarachnoid hemorrhage, and 6(4) cerebral sinus thrombosis. Subsequent stroke risks calculated with meta-analyses, under low to moderate heterogeneity, were 0.5 among all centres in all countries, and 0.7 among countries with higher health expenditures. The need for mechanical ventilation (OR: 1.9, 95 CI:1.1�3.5, p = 0.03) and the presence of ischaemic heart disease (OR: 2.5, 95 CI:1.4�4.7, p = 0.006) were predictive of stroke. Interpretation: The results of this multi-national study on hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection indicated an overall stroke risk of 0.5(pooled risk: 0.9). The need for mechanical ventilation and the history of ischaemic heart disease are the independent predictors of stroke among SARS-CoV-2 patients. Funding: None. © 2020 The Author

Safety of Intravenous Thrombolysis among Stroke Patients Taking New Oral Anticoagulants - Case Series and Systematic Review of Reported Cases

Background Current guidelines do not recommend the administration of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IV-tPA) to patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) who take new oral anticoagulants (NOACs). We present a multicenter case series of IV-tPA use while the patients are on NOACs, as well as a systematic review of the literature. Methods We reviewed the medical records of consecutive patients on NOACs who received IV-tPA for symptoms of AIS at four participating stroke centers in the United States and Europe. Safety endpoints were post-thrombolysis symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) or other serious systemic bleeding. Results Between October 2010 and October 2014, 6 patients received IV-tPA for possible AIS while taking dabigatran. None of the patients had sICH or any other hemorrhagic complication. Literature review resulted in a total of 26 patients receiving IV-tPA while on NOACs (dabigatran: 15, rivaroxaban: 10, apixaban: 1). Among them, two patients experienced sICH and died. None of the patients experienced major extracranial hemorrhage; however, minor and asymptomatic hemorrhagic complications were described in 7 patients. Pooled analysis indicates an sICH rate of 6.45% (95% CI by the adjusted Wald method:.8-21.7%). The mean interval between the last dose of NOAC and IV thrombolysis was 12 ± 7.8 [4-28.3] hours. Conclusions Although the safety of IV-tPA cannot be definitively confirmed in a small series, consideration of stroke severity and management of hemorrhage risk with general precautions with post-tPA management protocols can justify treatment in the absence of coagulopathy. © 2015 National Stroke Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

Intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke occurring during hospitalization for transient ischemic attack

10.1111/ijs.12125International Journal of Stroke94413-41

Intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke occurring during hospitalization for transient ischemic attack

Background: There are limited data regarding the use of intravenous thrombolysis in patients who experienced acute ischemic symptoms during their hospitalization for prior transient ischemic attack. Aim: We sought to prospectively evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke occurring during hospitalization for transient ischemic attack in an international, multicenter study. Methods: Consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke that occurred during hospitalization for prior transient ischemic attack were treated with intravenous thrombolysis in five tertiary-care stroke centers. Early arterial recanalization was determined by transcranial Doppler at the end of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator infusion using previously validated criteria. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage complicating intravenous thrombolysis was evaluated using the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Recombinant Tissue Plasminogen Activator Stroke Study definition. Functional independence at three-months was defined as Modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2. Results: Systemic recombinant tissue plasminogen activator infusion (median onset-to-treatment time 70mins, interquartile range 50-150) was given in 25 consecutive patients (mean age 66±10 years) who developed acute ischemic stroke symptoms (median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 10 points; interquartile range 8-14) during hospitalization for prior transient ischemic attack (median ABCD2 score 5 points; median time-to-symptom recurrence 24h, interquartile range 24-48). No symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (0%; 95% confidence interval 0-12%) was documented. Early complete recanalization occurred in 64% of patients (95% confidence interval 44-80%), and 84% (95% confidence interval 65-94%) achieved three-month functional independence. The rate of three-month functional independence was higher in patients treated with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator within 90mins from symptom onset compared with those with onset-to-treatment time>90mins (81% vs. 33%; P=0·031). Conclusions: Intravenous thrombolysis for symptoms of acute ischemic stroke occurring after hospitalization for transient ischemic attack appears to be safe. These pilot data support resetting the clock if new symptoms recur shortly after transient ischemic attack. © 2013 World Stroke Organization

Investigating the utility of previously developed prediction scores in acute ischemic stroke patients in the stroke belt

Background: To assess the utility of previously developed scoring systems, we compared SEDAN, named after the components of the score (baseline blood Sugar, Early infarct signs and (hyper) Dense cerebral artery sign on admission computed tomography scan, Age, and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale on admission), Totaled Health Risks in Vascular Events (THRIVE), Houston Intra-arterial Therapy (HIAT), and HIAT-2 scoring systems among patients receiving systemic (intravenous [IV] tissue plasminogen activator [tPA]) and endovascular (intra-arterial [IA]) treatments. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all IV tPA and IA patients presenting to our center from 2008-2011. The scores were assessed in patients who were treated with IV tPA only, IA only, and a combination of IV tPA and IA (IV-IA). We tested the ability of THRIVE to predict discharge modified Rankin scale (mRS) 3-6, HIAT and HIAT-2 discharge mRS 4-6, and SEDAN symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH). Results: Of the 366 patients who were included in this study, 243 had IV tPA only, 89 had IA only, and 34 had IV-IA. THRIVE was predictive of mRS 3-6 in the IV-IA (odds ratio [OR], 1.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30-2.91) and the IV group (OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.43-2.04), but not in the IA group. HIAT was predictive of mRS 4-6 in the IA (OR, 3.55; 95% CI, 1.65-7.25), IV (OR, 3.47; 95% CI, 2.26-5.33), and IV-IA group (OR, 6.48; 95% CI, 1.41-29.71). HIAT-2 was predictive of mRS 4-6 in the IA (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.03-1.87) and IV group (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.18-1.57), but not in the IV-IA group. SEDAN was not predictive of sICH in the IA or the IV-IA group, but was predictive in the IV group (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.01-2.36). Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that although highly predictive of outcome in the original study design treatment groups, prediction scores may not generalize to all patient samples, highlighting the importance of validating prediction scores in diverse samples

Investigating the Utility of Previously Developed Prediction Scores in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients in the Stroke Belt

BACKGROUND: To assess the utility of previously developed scoring systems, we compared SEDAN, named after the components of the score (baseline blood Sugar, Early infarct signs and (hyper) Dense cerebral artery sign on admission computed tomography scan, Age, and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale on admission), Totaled Health Risks in Vascular Events (THRIVE), Houston Intra-arterial Therapy (HIAT), and HIAT-2 scoring systems among patients receiving systemic (intravenous [IV] tissue plasminogen activator [tPA]) and endovascular (intra-arterial [IA]) treatments. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all IV tPA and IA patients presenting to our center from 2008–2011. The scores were assessed in patients who were treated with IV tPA only, IA only, and a combination of IV tPA and IA (IV-IA). We tested the ability of THRIVE to predict discharge modified Rankin scale (mRS) 3–6, HIAT and HIAT-2 discharge mRS 4–6, and SEDAN symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH). RESULTS: Of the 366 patients who were included in this study, 243 had IV tPA only, 89 had IA only, and 34 had IV-IA. THRIVE was predictive of mRS 3–6 in the IV-IA (odds ratio [OR], 1.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30–2.91) and the IV group (OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.43–2.04), but not in the IA group. HIAT was predictive of mRS 4–6 in the IA (OR, 3.55; 95% CI, 1.65–7.25), IV (OR, 3.47; 95% CI, 2.26–5.33), and IV-IA group (OR, 6.48; 95% CI, 1.41–29.71). HIAT-2 was predictive of mRS 4–6 in the IA (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.03–1.87) and IV group (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.18–1.57), but not in the IV-IA group. SEDAN was not predictive of sICH in the IA or the IV-IA group, but was predictive in the IV group (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.01–2.36). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that although highly predictive of outcome in the original study design treatment groups, prediction scores may not generalize to all patient samples, highlighting the importance of validating prediction scores in diverse samples

Anticoagulation Versus Antiplatelets in Spontaneous Cervical Artery Dissection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND It is uncertain whether antiplatelets or anticoagulants are more effective in preventing early recurrent stroke in patients with cervical artery dissection. Following the publication of the observational Antithrombotic for STOP-CAD (Stroke Prevention in Cervical Artery Dissection) study, which has more than doubled available data, we performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis comparing antiplatelets versus anticoagulation in cervical artery dissection. METHODS The systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023468063). We searched 5 databases using a combination of keywords that encompass different antiplatelets and anticoagulants, as well as cervical artery dissection. We included relevant randomized trials and included observational studies of dissection unrelated to major trauma. Where studies were sufficiently similar, we performed meta-analyses for efficacy (ischemic stroke) and safety (major hemorrhage, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and death) outcomes using relative risks. RESULTS We identified 11 studies (2 randomized trials and 9 observational studies) that met the inclusion criteria. These included 5039 patients (30% [1512] treated with anticoagulation and 70% [3527]) treated with antiplatelets]. In meta-analysis, anticoagulation was associated with a lower ischemic stroke risk (relative risk, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.43 to 0.94]; P=0.02; I2=0%) but higher major bleeding risk (relative risk, 2.25 [95% CI, 1.07 to 4.72]; P=0.03, I2=0%). The risks of death and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage were similar between the 2 treatments. Effect sizes were larger in randomized trials. There are insufficient data on the efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy or direct oral anticoagulants. CONCLUSIONS In this study of patients with cervical artery dissection, anticoagulation was superior to antiplatelet therapy in reducing ischemic stroke but carried a higher major bleeding risk. This argues for an individualized therapeutic approach incorporating the net clinical benefit of ischemic stroke reduction and bleeding risks. Large randomized clinical trials are required to clarify optimal antithrombotic strategies for management of cervical artery dissection