EndoVAscular treatment and ThRombolysis for Ischemic Stroke Patients (EVA-TRISP) registry: basis and methodology of a pan-European prospective ischaemic stroke revascularisation treatment registry

PURPOSE The Thrombolysis in Ischemic Stroke Patients (TRISP) collaboration was a concerted effort initiated in 2010 with the purpose to address relevant research questions about the effectiveness and safety of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT). The collaboration also aims to prospectively collect data on patients undergoing endovascular treatment (EVT) and hence the name of the collaboration was changed from TRISP to EVA-TRISP. The methodology of the former TRISP registry for patients treated with IVT has already been published. This paper focuses on describing the EVT part of the registry. PARTICIPANTS All centres committed to collecting predefined variables on consecutive patients prospectively. We aim for accuracy and completeness of the data and to adapt local databases to investigate novel research questions. Herein, we introduce the methodology of a recently constructed academic investigator-initiated open collaboration EVT registry built as an extension of an existing IVT registry in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS). FINDINGS TO DATE Currently, the EVA-TRISP network includes 20 stroke centres with considerable expertise in EVT and maintenance of high-quality hospital-based registries. Following several successful randomised controlled trials (RCTs), many important clinical questions remain unanswered in the (EVT) field and some of them will unlikely be investigated in future RCTs. Prospective registries with high-quality data on EVT-treated patients may help answering some of these unanswered issues, especially on safety and efficacy of EVT in specific patient subgroups. FUTURE PLANS This collaborative effort aims at addressing clinically important questions on safety and efficacy of EVT in conditions not covered by RCTs. The TRISP registry generated substantial novel data supporting stroke physicians in their daily decision making considering IVT candidate patients. While providing observational data on EVT in daily clinical practice, our future findings may likewise be hypothesis generating for future research as well as for quality improvement (on EVT). The collaboration welcomes participation of further centres willing to fulfill the commitment and the outlined requirements

Collateral Circulation and Outcome in Atherosclerotic Versus Cardioembolic Cerebral Large Vessel Occlusion

Background and Purpose- Due to chronic hypoperfusion, cervical atherosclerosis may promote cerebral collateral circulation. We hypothesized that patients with ischemic stroke due to cervical carotid atherosclerosis have a more extensive collateral circulation and better outcomes than patients with cardioembolism. We tested this hypothesis in a population of patients who underwent endovascular treatment for large vessel occlusion. Methods- From the MR-CLEAN Registry (Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands), we selected consecutive adult endovascular treatment patients (March 2014 to June 2016) with acute ischemic stroke due to anterior circulation large vessel occlusion and compared patients with cervical carotid artery stenosis >50% to those with cardioembolic etiology. The primary outcome was collateral score, graded on a 4-point scale. Secondary outcomes included the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score and mortality at 90 days. We performed multivariable regression analyses and adjusted for potential confounders. Results- Of 1627 patients in the Registry, 190 patients with cervical carotid atherosclerosis and 476 with cardioembolism were included. Patients with cervical carotid atherosclerosis were younger (median 69 versus 76 years, P<0.001), more often male (67% versus 47%, P<0.001), more often had an internal carotid artery terminus occlusion (33% versus 18%, P<0.001), and a lower prestroke mRS (mRS score, 0-2; 96% versus 85%, P<0.001), than patients with cardioembolism. Stroke due to cervical carotid atherosclerosis was associated with higher collateral score (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.67 [95% CI, 1.17-2.39]) and lower median mRS at 90 days (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.03-2.05]) compared with cardioembolic stroke. There was no statistically significant difference in proportion of mRS 0-2 (aOR, 1.36 [95% CI, 0.90-2.07]) or mortality at 90 days (aOR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.48-1.34]). Conclusions- Patients with stroke due to cervical carotid atherosclerosis had a more extensive cerebral collateral circulation and a slightly better median mRS at 90 days than patients with cardioembolic stroke

Platelet transfusion versus standard care after acute stroke due to spontaneous cerebral haemorrhage associated with antiplatelet therapy (PATCH): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Platelet transfusion after acute spontaneous primary intracerebral haemorrhage in people taking antiplatelet therapy might reduce death or dependence by reducing the extent of the haemorrhage. We aimed to investigate whether platelet transfusion with standard care, compared with standard care alone, reduced death or dependence after intracerebral haemorrhage associated with antiplatelet therapy use. METHODS: We did this multicentre, open-label, masked-endpoint, randomised trial at 60 hospitals in the Netherlands, UK, and France. We enrolled adults within 6 h of supratentorial intracerebral haemorrhage symptom onset if they had used antiplatelet therapy for at least 7 days beforehand and had a Glasgow Coma Scale score of at least 8. With use of a secure web-based system that concealed allocation and used biased coin randomisation, study collaborators randomly assigned participants (1:1; stratified by hospital and type of antiplatelet therapy) to receive either standard care or standard care with platelet transfusion within 90 min of diagnostic brain imaging. Participants and local investigators giving interventions were not masked to treatment allocation, but allocation was concealed from outcome assessors and investigators analysing data. The primary outcome was shift towards death or dependence rated on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 3 months, and analysed by ordinal logistic regression, adjusted for stratification variables and the Intracerebral Haemorrhage Score. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat and as-treated populations. This trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, number NTR1303, and is now closed. FINDINGS: Between Feb 4, 2009, and Oct 8, 2015, 41 sites enrolled 190 participants. 97 participants were randomly assigned to platelet transfusion and 93 to standard care. The odds of death or dependence at 3 months were higher in the platelet transfusion group than in the standard care group (adjusted common odds ratio 2.05, 95% CI 1.18-3.56; p=0.0114). 40 (42%) participants who received platelet transfusion had a serious adverse event during their hospital stay, as did 28 (29%) who received standard care. 23 (24%) participants assigned to platelet transfusion and 16 (17%) assigned to standard care died during hospital stay. INTERPRETATION: Platelet transfusion seems inferior to standard care for people taking antiplatelet therapy before intracerebral haemorrhage. Platelet transfusion cannot be recommended for this indication in clinical practice. FUNDING: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Sanquin Blood Supply, Chest Heart and Stroke Scotland, French Ministry of Health

IV thrombolysis and renal function

OBJECTIVE To investigate the association of renal impairment on functional outcome and complications in stroke patients treated with IV thrombolysis (IVT). METHODS In this observational study, we compared the estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) with poor 3-month outcome (modified Rankin Scale scores 3-6), death, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) based on the criteria of the European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study II trial. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Patients without IVT treatment served as a comparison group. RESULTS Among 4,780 IVT-treated patients, 1,217 (25.5%) had a low GFR (<60 mL/min/1.73 m(2)). A GFR decrease by 10 mL/min/1.73 m(2) increased the risk of poor outcome (OR [95% CI]): (ORunadjusted 1.20 [1.17-1.24]; ORadjusted 1.05 [1.01-1.09]), death (ORunadjusted 1.33 [1.28-1.38]; ORadjusted 1.18 [1.11-1.249]), and sICH (ORunadjusted 1.15 [1.01-1.22]; ORadjusted 1.11 [1.04-1.20]). Low GFR was independently associated with poor 3-month outcome (ORadjusted 1.32 [1.10-1.58]), death (ORadjusted 1.73 [1.39-2.14]), and sICH (ORadjusted 1.64 [1.21-2.23]) compared with normal GFR (60-120 mL/min/1.73 m(2)). Low GFR (ORadjusted 1.64 [1.21-2.23]) and stroke severity (ORadjusted 1.05 [1.03-1.07]) independently determined sICH. Compared with patients who did not receive IVT, treatment with IVT in patients with low GFR was associated with poor outcome (ORadjusted 1.79 [1.41-2.25]), and with favorable outcome in those with normal GFR (ORadjusted 0.77 [0.63-0.94]). CONCLUSION Renal function significantly modified outcome and complication rates in IVT-treated stroke patients. Lower GFR might be a better risk indicator for sICH than age. A decrease of GFR by 10 mL/min/1.73 m(2) seems to have a similar impact on the risk of death or sICH as a 1-point-higher NIH Stroke Scale score measuring stroke severity

EndoVAscular treatment and ThRombolysis for Ischemic Stroke Patients (EVA-TRISP) registry: basis and methodology of a pan-European prospective ischaemic stroke revascularisation treatment registry.

PURPOSE The Thrombolysis in Ischemic Stroke Patients (TRISP) collaboration was a concerted effort initiated in 2010 with the purpose to address relevant research questions about the effectiveness and safety of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT). The collaboration also aims to prospectively collect data on patients undergoing endovascular treatment (EVT) and hence the name of the collaboration was changed from TRISP to EVA-TRISP. The methodology of the former TRISP registry for patients treated with IVT has already been published. This paper focuses on describing the EVT part of the registry. PARTICIPANTS All centres committed to collecting predefined variables on consecutive patients prospectively. We aim for accuracy and completeness of the data and to adapt local databases to investigate novel research questions. Herein, we introduce the methodology of a recently constructed academic investigator-initiated open collaboration EVT registry built as an extension of an existing IVT registry in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS). FINDINGS TO DATE Currently, the EVA-TRISP network includes 20 stroke centres with considerable expertise in EVT and maintenance of high-quality hospital-based registries. Following several successful randomised controlled trials (RCTs), many important clinical questions remain unanswered in the (EVT) field and some of them will unlikely be investigated in future RCTs. Prospective registries with high-quality data on EVT-treated patients may help answering some of these unanswered issues, especially on safety and efficacy of EVT in specific patient subgroups. FUTURE PLANS This collaborative effort aims at addressing clinically important questions on safety and efficacy of EVT in conditions not covered by RCTs. The TRISP registry generated substantial novel data supporting stroke physicians in their daily decision making considering IVT candidate patients. While providing observational data on EVT in daily clinical practice, our future findings may likewise be hypothesis generating for future research as well as for quality improvement (on EVT). The collaboration welcomes participation of further centres willing to fulfill the commitment and the outlined requirements

Early administration of aspirin in patients treated with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke: a randomised controlled trial

Background Thrombolysis with intravenous alteplase is the only approved treatment for acute ischaemic stroke. After alteplase-induced recanalisation, reocclusion occurs in 14-34% of patients, probably because of platelet activation. Early administration of antiplatelet therapy after alteplase could reduce the risk of reocclusion and improve outcome. We compared the effects of early addition of intravenous aspirin to alteplase with standard alteplase without aspirin. Methods In this multicentre, randomised, open-label trial with blind-endpoint assessment, patients with acute ischaemic stroke treated with alteplase were randomly assigned to 300 mg intravenous aspirin within 90 min after start of alteplase treatment or to no additional treatment. In both groups, oral antiplatelet therapy was started 24 h after alteplase treatment. The primary endpoint was favourable outcome, defined as a score of 0-2 on the modified Rankin scale at 3 months. This trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR822). Findings Between July 29, 2008, and April 20, 2011, 642 patients (322 patients aspirin, 320 patients standard treatment) of the targeted 800 patients were enrolled. At that time, the trial was terminated prematurely because of an excess of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (SICH) and no evidence of benefit in the aspirin group. At 3 months, 174 (54.0%) patients in the aspirin group versus 183 (57.2%) patients in the standard treatment group had a favourable outcome (absolute difference -3.2%, 95% CI -10.8 to 4.2; crude relative risk 0.94, 0.82 to 1.09, p=0.42). Adjusted odds ratio was 0.91 (95% CI 0.66-1.26, p=0.58). SICH occurred more often in the aspirin group (14 [4.3%] patients) than in the standard treatment group (five [1.6%]; absolute difference 2.8%, 95% CI 0.2-5.4; p=0.04). SICH was more often the cause of poor outcome in the aspirin group compared with the standard treatment group (11 vs 1, p=0.006). Interpretation Early administration of intravenous aspirin in patients with acute ischaemic stroke treated with alteplase does not improve outcome at 3 months and increases the risk of SICH. The results of this trial do not support a change of the current guidelines, which advise to start antiplatelet therapy 24 h after alteplas