Background: Intra-arterial treatment (IAT) improves outcomes in acute ischaemic stroke. Presence of collaterals increases likelihood of good outcome. We investigated whether variations in the... Show moreBackground: Intra-arterial treatment (IAT) improves outcomes in acute ischaemic stroke. Presence of collaterals increases likelihood of good outcome. We investigated whether variations in the circle of Willis (CoW) and contributing carotid arteries influence outcome in patients who had a stroke treated with IAT. Methods: CT angiography data on patients who had an acute stroke treated with IAT were retrospectively collected. CoW was regarded complete if the contralateral A1 segment, anterior communicating artery and ipsilateral posterior communicating artery were fully developed, and the P1 segment was visible. Carotid artery contribution was studied with a self-developed carotid artery score ranging from 0 to 2 depending on the number of arteries supplying the occluded side of the CoW. Good clinical outcome was defined as modified Rankin Score <= 2 and measured at discharge and 3 months. We calculated risk ratios for the relation between completeness of the CoW, carotid score and good outcome, and performed a trend analysis for good outcome according to the carotid score. Results: 126 patients were included for analysis. Patients with a complete and incomplete CoW had a comparable risk for good outcome at discharge and 3 months. A higher carotid score was associated with a higher likelihood of good clinical outcome (p for trend 0.24 at discharge and 0.05 at 3 months). Conclusion: In patients with acute ischaemic stroke treated with IAT, chances of good clinical outcome tended to improve with number of carotid arteries supplying the cerebral circulation. Completeness of the CoW was not related to clinical outcome. Show less
Background Aspirin and unfractionated heparin are often used during endovascular stroke treatment to improve reperfusion and outcomes. However, the effects and risks of anti-thrombotics for this... Show moreBackground Aspirin and unfractionated heparin are often used during endovascular stroke treatment to improve reperfusion and outcomes. However, the effects and risks of anti-thrombotics for this indication are unknown. We therefore aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of intravenous aspirin, unfractionated heparin, both, or neither started during endovascular treatment in patients with ischaemic stroke.Methods We did an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial with a 2 x 3 factorial design in 15 centres in the Netherlands. We enrolled adult patients (ie, >= 18 years) with ischaemic stroke due to an intracranial large-vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation in whom endovascular treatment could be initiated within 6 h of symptom onset. Eligible patients had a score of 2 or more on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, and a CT or MRI ruling out intracranial haemorrhage. Randomisation was done using a web-based procedure with permuted blocks and stratified by centre. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either periprocedural intravenous aspirin (300 mg bolus) or no aspirin, and randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive moderate-dose unfractionated heparin (5000 IU bolus followed by 1250 IU/h for 6 h), low-dose unfractionated heparin (5000 IU bolus followed by 500 IU/h for 6 h), or no unfractionated heparin. The primary outcome was the score on the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days. Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage was the main safety outcome. Analyses were based on intention to treat, and treatment effects were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) or common ORs, with adjustment for baseline prognostic factors. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number, ISRCTN76741621.Findings Between Jan 22, 2018, and Jan 27, 2021, we randomly assigned 663 patients; of whom, 628 (95%) provided deferred consent or died before consent could be asked and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. On Feb 4, 2021, after unblinding and analysis of the data, the trial steering committee permanently stopped patient recruitment and the trial was stopped for safety concerns. The risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage was higher in patients allocated to receive aspirin than in those not receiving aspirin (43 [14%] of 310 vs 23 [7%] of 318; adjusted OR 1.95 [95% CI 1.13-3.35]) as well as in patients allocated to receive unfractionated heparin than in those not receiving unfractionated heparin (44 [13%] of 332 vs 22 [7%] of 296; 1.98 [1.14-3.46]). Both aspirin (adjusted common OR 0.91 [95% CI 0.69-1.21]) and unfractionated heparin (0.81 [0.61-1.08]) led to a non-significant shift towards worse modified Rankin Scale scores.Interpretation Periprocedural intravenous aspirin and unfractionated heparin during endovascular stroke treatment are both associated with an increased risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage without evidence for a beneficial effect on functional outcome. Copyright (C) 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Show less
Background Aspirin and unfractionated heparin are often used during endovascular stroke treatment to improve reperfusion and outcomes. However, the effects and risks of anti-thrombotics for this... Show moreBackground Aspirin and unfractionated heparin are often used during endovascular stroke treatment to improve reperfusion and outcomes. However, the effects and risks of anti-thrombotics for this indication are unknown. We therefore aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of intravenous aspirin, unfractionated heparin, both, or neither started during endovascular treatment in patients with ischaemic stroke.Methods We did an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial with a 2 x 3 factorial design in 15 centres in the Netherlands. We enrolled adult patients (ie, >= 18 years) with ischaemic stroke due to an intracranial large-vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation in whom endovascular treatment could be initiated within 6 h of symptom onset. Eligible patients had a score of 2 or more on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, and a CT or MRI ruling out intracranial haemorrhage. Randomisation was done using a web-based procedure with permuted blocks and stratified by centre. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either periprocedural intravenous aspirin (300 mg bolus) or no aspirin, and randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive moderate-dose unfractionated heparin (5000 IU bolus followed by 1250 IU/h for 6 h), low-dose unfractionated heparin (5000 IU bolus followed by 500 IU/h for 6 h), or no unfractionated heparin. The primary outcome was the score on the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days. Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage was the main safety outcome. Analyses were based on intention to treat, and treatment effects were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) or common ORs, with adjustment for baseline prognostic factors. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number, ISRCTN76741621.Findings Between Jan 22, 2018, and Jan 27, 2021, we randomly assigned 663 patients; of whom, 628 (95%) provided deferred consent or died before consent could be asked and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. On Feb 4, 2021, after unblinding and analysis of the data, the trial steering committee permanently stopped patient recruitment and the trial was stopped for safety concerns. The risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage was higher in patients allocated to receive aspirin than in those not receiving aspirin (43 [14%] of 310 vs 23 [7%] of 318; adjusted OR 1.95 [95% CI 1.13-3.35]) as well as in patients allocated to receive unfractionated heparin than in those not receiving unfractionated heparin (44 [13%] of 332 vs 22 [7%] of 296; 1.98 [1.14-3.46]). Both aspirin (adjusted common OR 0.91 [95% CI 0.69-1.21]) and unfractionated heparin (0.81 [0.61-1.08]) led to a non-significant shift towards worse modified Rankin Scale scores.Interpretation Periprocedural intravenous aspirin and unfractionated heparin during endovascular stroke treatment are both associated with an increased risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage without evidence for a beneficial effect on functional outcome. Copyright (C) 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Show less
Amini, M.; Leeuwen, N. van; Eijkenaar, F.; Mulder, M.J.H.L.; Schonewille, W.; Nijeholt, G.L.A.; ... ; MR CLEAN Registry Investigators 2020
BackgroundBetween-center variation in outcome may offer opportunities to identify variation in quality of care. By intervening on these quality differences, patient outcomes may be improved.... Show moreBackgroundBetween-center variation in outcome may offer opportunities to identify variation in quality of care. By intervening on these quality differences, patient outcomes may be improved. However, whether observed differences in outcome reflect the true quality improvement potential is not known for many diseases. Therefore, we aimed to analyze the effect of differences in performance on structure and processes of care, and case-mix on between-center differences in outcome after endovascular treatment (EVT) for ischemic stroke.MethodsIn this observational cohort study, ischemic stroke patients who received EVT between 2014 and 2017 in all 17 Dutch EVT-centers were included. Primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale, ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 6 (death), at 90days. We used random effect proportional odds regression modelling, to analyze the effect of differences in structure indicators (center volume and year of admission), process indicators (time to treatment and use of general anesthesia) and case-mix, by tracking changes in tau(2), which represents the amount of between-center variation in outcome.ResultsThree thousand two hundred seventy-nine patients were included. Performance on structure and process indicators varied significantly between EVT-centers (P<0.001). Predicted probability of good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale 0-2 at 90days), which can be interpreted as an overall measure of a center's case-mix, varied significantly between 17 and 50% across centers. The amount of between-center variation (tau(2)) was estimated at 0.040 in a model only accounting for random variation. This estimate more than doubled after adding case-mix variables (tau(2): 0.086) to the model, while a small amount of between-center variation was explained by variation in performance on structure and process indicators (tau(2): 0.081 and 0.089, respectively). This indicates that variation in case-mix affects the differences in outcome to a much larger extent.ConclusionsBetween-center variation in outcome of ischemic stroke patients mostly reflects differences in case-mix, rather than differences in structure or process of care. Since the latter two capture the real quality improvement potential, these should be used as indicators for comparing center performance. Especially when a strong association exists between those indicators and outcome, as is the case for time to treatment in ischemic stroke. Show less
Background and Purpose- The location of the thrombus as observed on first digital subtraction angiography during endovascular treatment may differ from the initial observation on initial... Show moreBackground and Purpose- The location of the thrombus as observed on first digital subtraction angiography during endovascular treatment may differ from the initial observation on initial noninvasive imaging. We studied the incidence of thrombus dynamics, its impact on patient outcomes, and its association with intravenous thrombolytics. Methods- We included patients from the MR CLEAN registry (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke) with an initial target occlusion on computed tomography angiography located in the intracranial internal carotid artery, M1, or M2. The conventional angiography target occlusion was defined during endovascular treatment. Thrombus dynamics were classified as growth, stability, migration, and resolution. The primary outcome was functional outcome at 90 days (modified Rankin Scale). The secondary outcomes were successful and complete reperfusion (extended treatment in cerebral infarction scores of 2b-3 and 3, respectively). Results- The analysis included 1349 patients. Thrombus migration occurred in 302 (22%) patients, thrombus growth in 87 (6%), and thrombus resolution in 39 (3%). Intravenous treatment with alteplase was associated with more thrombus migration (adjusted odds ratio, 2.01; CI, 1.29-3.11) and thrombus resolution (adjusted odds ratio, 1.85; CI, 1.22-2.80). Thrombus migration was associated with a lower chance of complete reperfusion (adjusted odds ratio, 0.57; CI, 0.42-0.78) and successful reperfusion (adjusted odds ratio, 0.74; CI, 0.55-0.99). In the subgroup of patients with M1 initial target occlusion, thrombus migration was associated with better functional outcome (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.49; CI, 1.02-2.17), and there was a trend towards better functional outcome in patients with thrombus resolution (adjusted common odds ratio, 2.23; CI, 0.93-5.37). Conclusions- In patients with acute ischemic stroke, thrombus location regularly changes between computed tomography angiography and digital subtraction angiography. Administration of intravenous alteplase increases the chance of thrombus migration and resolution. Thrombus migration is associated with better functional outcome but reduces the rate of complete reperfusion. Show less
