Effect of First-Pass Reperfusion on Outcome After Endovascular Treatment for Ischemic Stroke

Background First-pass reperfusion (FPR) is associated with favorable outcome after endovascular treatment. It is unknown whether this effect is independent of patient characteristics and whether FPR has better outcomes compared with excellent reperfusion (Expanded Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction [eTICI] 2C-3) after multiple-passes reperfusion. We aimed to evaluate the association between FPR and outcome with adjustment for patient, imaging, and treatment characteristics to single out the contribution of FPR. Methods and Results FPR was defined as eTICI 2C-3 after 1 pass. Multivariable regression models were used to investigate characteristics associated with FPR and to investigate the effect of FPR on outcomes. We included 2686 patients of the MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) Registry. Factors associated with FPR were as follows: history of hyperlipidemia (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.10), middle cerebral artery versus intracranial carotid artery occlusion (adjusted OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06-1.16), and aspiration versus stent thrombectomy (adjusted OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.11). Interventionist experience increased the likelihood of FPR (adjusted OR, 1.03 per 50 patients previously treated; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06). Adjusted for patient, imaging, and treatment characteristics, FPR remained associated with a better 24-hour National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score (-37%; 95% CI, -43% to -31%) and a better modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 3 months (adjusted common OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.83-2.54) compared with no FPR (multiple-passes reperfusion+no excellent reperfusion), and compared with multiple-passes reperfusion alone (24-hour NIHSS score, (-23%; 95% CI, -31% to -14%), and mRS score (adjusted common OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.19-1.78)). Conclusions FPR compared with multiple-passes reperfusion is associated with favorable outcome, independently of patient, imaging, and treatment characteristics. Factors associated with FPR were the experience of the interventionist, history of hyperlipidemia, location of occluded artery, and use of an aspiration device compared with stent thrombectomy

Estimation of treatment effects in observational stroke care data: comparison of statistical approaches

Introduction: Various statistical approaches can be used to deal with unmeasured confounding when estimating treatment effects in observational studies, each with its own pros and cons. This study aimed to compare treatment effects as estimated by different statistical approaches for two interventions in observational stroke care data. Patients and methods: We used prospectively collected data from the MR CLEAN registry including all patients (n = 3279) with ischemic stroke who underwent endovascular treatment (EVT) from 2014 to 2017 in 17 Dutch hospitals. Treatment effects of two interventions – i.e., receiving an intravenous thrombolytic (IVT) and undergoing general anesthesia (GA) before EVT – on good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale ≤2) were estimated. We used three statistical regression-based approaches that vary in assumptions regarding the source of unmeasured confounding: individual-level (two subtypes), ecological, and instrumental variable analyses. In the latter, the preference for using the interventions in each hospital was used as an instrument. Results: Use of IVT (range 66–87%) and GA (range 0–93%) varied substantially between hospitals. For IVT, the individual-level (OR ~ 1.33) resulted in significant positive effect estimates whereas in instrumental variable analysis no significant treatment effect was found (OR 1.11; 95% CI 0.58–1.56). The ecological analysis indicated no statistically significant different likelihood (β = − 0.002%; P = 0.99) of good functional outcome at hospitals using IVT 1% more frequently. For GA, we found non-significant opposite directions of points estimates the treatment effect in the individual-level (ORs ~ 0.60) versus the instrumental variable approach (OR = 1.04). The ecological analysis also resulted in a non-significant negative association (0.03% lower probability). Discussion and conclusion: Both magnitude and direction of the estimated treatment effects for both interventions depend strongly on the statistical approach and thus on the source of (unmeasured) confounding. These issues should be understood concerning the specific characteristics of data, before applying an approach and interpreting the results. Instrumental variable analysis might be considered when unobserved confounding and practice variation is expected in observational multicenter studies

Prognostic Value of Thrombus Volume and Interaction With First-Line Endovascular Treatment Device Choice

BACKGROUND: A larger thrombus in patients with acute ischemic stroke might result in more complex endovascular treatment procedures, resulting in poorer patient outcomes. Current evidence on thrombus volume and length related to procedural and functional outcomes remains contradicting. This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of thrombus volume and thrombus length and whether this relationship differs between first-line stent retrievers and aspiration devices for endovascular treatment.METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, 670 of 3279 patients from the MR CLEAN Registry (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) for endovascularly treated large vessel occlusions were included. Thrombus volume (0.1 mL) and length (0.1 mm) based on manual segmentations and measurements were related to reperfusion grade (expanded Treatment in Cerebral Infarction score) after endovascular treatment, the number of retrieval attempts, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and a shift for functional outcome at 90 days measured with the reverted ordinal modified Rankin Scale (odds ratio &gt;1 implies a favorable outcome). Univariable and multivariable linear and logistic regression were used to report common odds ratios (cORs)/adjusted cOR and regression coefficients (B/aB) with 95% CIs. Furthermore, a multiplicative interaction term was used to analyze the relationship between first-line device choice, stent retrievers versus aspiration device, thrombus volume, and outcomes.RESULTS: Thrombus volume was associated with functional outcome (adjusted cOR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.71-0.97]) and number of retrieval attempts (aB, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.16-0.28]) but not with the other outcome measures. Thrombus length was only associated with functional independence (adjusted cOR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.24-0.85]). Patients with more voluminous thrombi had worse functional outcomes if endovascular treatment was based on first-line stent retrievers (interaction cOR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.50-0.89]; P=0.005; adjusted cOR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.55-1.0]; P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, patients with a more voluminous thrombus required more endovascular thrombus retrieval attempts and had a worse functional outcome. Patients with a lengthier thrombus were less likely to achieve functional independence at 90 days. For more voluminous thrombi, first-line stent retrieval compared with first-line aspiration might be associated with worse functional outcome.</p

Clinical phenotypes and quality of life to define post-COVID-19 syndrome: a cluster analysis of the multinational, prospective ORCHESTRA cohortResearch in context

Summary: Background: Lack of specific definitions of clinical characteristics, disease severity, and risk and preventive factors of post-COVID-19 syndrome (PCS) severely impacts research and discovery of new preventive and therapeutics drugs. Methods: This prospective multicenter cohort study was conducted from February 2020 to June 2022 in 5 countries, enrolling SARS-CoV-2 out- and in-patients followed at 3-, 6-, and 12-month from diagnosis, with assessment of clinical and biochemical features, antibody (Ab) response, Variant of Concern (VoC), and physical and mental quality of life (QoL). Outcome of interest was identification of risk and protective factors of PCS by clinical phenotype, setting, severity of disease, treatment, and vaccination status. We used SF-36 questionnaire to assess evolution in QoL index during follow-up and unsupervised machine learning algorithms (principal component analysis, PCA) to explore symptom clusters. Severity of PCS was defined by clinical phenotype and QoL. We also used generalized linear models to analyse the impact of PCS on QoL and associated risk and preventive factors. CT registration number: NCT05097677. Findings: Among 1796 patients enrolled, 1030 (57%) suffered from at least one symptom at 12-month. PCA identified 4 clinical phenotypes: chronic fatigue-like syndrome (CFs: fatigue, headache and memory loss, 757 patients, 42%), respiratory syndrome (REs: cough and dyspnoea, 502, 23%); chronic pain syndrome (CPs: arthralgia and myalgia, 399, 22%); and neurosensorial syndrome (NSs: alteration in taste and smell, 197, 11%). Determinants of clinical phenotypes were different (all comparisons p < 0.05): being female increased risk of CPs, NSs, and CFs; chronic pulmonary diseases of REs; neurological symptoms at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis of REs, NSs, and CFs; oxygen therapy of CFs and REs; and gastrointestinal symptoms at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis of CFs. Early treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection with monoclonal Ab (all clinical phenotypes), corticosteroids therapy for mild/severe cases (NSs), and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (CPs) were less likely to be associated to PCS (all comparisons p < 0.05). Highest reduction in QoL was detected in REs and CPs (43.57 and 43.86 vs 57.32 in PCS-negative controls, p < 0.001). Female sex (p < 0.001), gastrointestinal symptoms (p = 0.034) and renal complications (p = 0.002) during the acute infection were likely to increase risk of severe PCS (QoL <50). Vaccination and early treatment with monoclonal Ab reduced the risk of severe PCS (p = 0.01 and p = 0.03, respectively). Interpretation: Our study provides new evidence suggesting that PCS can be classified by clinical phenotypes with different impact on QoL, underlying possible different pathogenic mechanisms. We identified factors associated to each clinical phenotype and to severe PCS. These results might help in designing pathogenesis studies and in selecting high-risk patients for inclusion in therapeutic and management clinical trials. Funding: The study received funding from the Horizon 2020 ORCHESTRA project, grant 101016167; from the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMw), grant 10430012010023; from Inserm, REACTing (REsearch &amp; ACtion emergING infectious diseases) consortium and the French Ministry of Health, grant PHRC 20-0424