Background and ObjectivesPatients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion (LVO) deemed eligible for endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) are transferred from the emergency room to the... Show moreBackground and ObjectivesPatients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion (LVO) deemed eligible for endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) are transferred from the emergency room to the angiography suite to undergo the procedure. Recently, the strategy of direct transfer of patients with suspected LVO to the angiography suite (DTAS) has been shown to improve functional outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the DTAS strategy vs initial transfer of patients with suspected LVO (Rapid Arterial Occlusion Evaluation score >4 and NIH Stroke Scale >10) to the emergency room (ITER).MethodsA decision-analytic Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the DTAS strategy vs the ITER strategy from a Dutch health care perspective with a 10-year time horizon. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) using Dutch thresholds of $59,135 (€50,000) and $94,616 (€80,000) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Uncertainty of input parameters was assessed using 1-way sensitivity analysis, scenario analysis, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.ResultsThe DTAS strategy yielded 0.65 additional QALYs at an additional $16,089, resulting in an ICER of $24,925/QALY compared with the ITER strategy. The ICER varied from $27,169 to $38,325/QALY across different scenarios. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the DTAS strategy had a 91.8% and 97.0% likelihood of being cost-effective at a decision threshold of $59,135/QALY and $94,616/QALY, respectively.DiscussionThe cost-effectiveness of the DTAS strategy over ITER is robust for patients with suspected LVO. Together with recently published clinical results, this means that implementation of the DTAS strategy may be considered to improve the workflow and outcome of EVT. Show less
Background and ObjectivesCOVID-19-related inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and coagulopathy may increase the bleeding risk and lower the efficacy of revascularization treatments in patients... Show moreBackground and ObjectivesCOVID-19-related inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and coagulopathy may increase the bleeding risk and lower the efficacy of revascularization treatments in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We aimed to evaluate the safety and outcomes of revascularization treatments in patients with AIS and COVID-19.MethodsThis was a retrospective multicenter cohort study of consecutive patients with AIS receiving intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and/or endovascular treatment (EVT) between March 2020 and June 2021 tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. With a doubly robust model combining propensity score weighting and multivariate regression, we studied the association of COVID-19 with intracranial bleeding complications and clinical outcomes. Subgroup analyses were performed according to treatment groups (IVT-only and EVT).ResultsOf a total of 15,128 included patients from 105 centers, 853 (5.6%) were diagnosed with COVID-19; of those, 5,848 (38.7%) patients received IVT-only and 9,280 (61.3%) EVT (with or without IVT). Patients with COVID-19 had a higher rate of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH) (adjusted OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.16-2.01), symptomatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (SSAH) (OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.20-2.69), SICH and/or SSAH combined (OR 1.56; 95% CI 1.23-1.99), 24-hour mortality (OR 2.47; 95% CI 1.58-3.86), and 3-month mortality (OR 1.88; 95% CI 1.52-2.33). Patients with COVID-19 also had an unfavorable shift in the distribution of the modified Rankin score at 3 months (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.26-1.60).DiscussionPatients with AIS and COVID-19 showed higher rates of intracranial bleeding complications and worse clinical outcomes after revascularization treatments than contemporaneous non-COVID-19 patients receiving treatment. Current available data do not allow direct conclusions to be drawn on the effectiveness of revascularization treatments in patients with COVID-19 or to establish different treatment recommendations in this subgroup of patients with ischemic stroke. Our findings can be taken into consideration for treatment decisions, patient monitoring, and establishing prognosis. Show less
Introduction: Computed tomography perfusion (CTP) is variably considered to assess eligibility for endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in acute ischemic (AIS) stroke patients. Although CTP is... Show moreIntroduction: Computed tomography perfusion (CTP) is variably considered to assess eligibility for endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in acute ischemic (AIS) stroke patients. Although CTP is recommended for patient selection in later (6-24 h) time window, it is currently not recommended in the earlier (0-6 h) time window and the costs and health effects of including CTP for EVT selection remain unknown. We aim to estimate the costs and health effects of using CTP for EVT selection in AIS patients compared to conventional selection. Patients and methods: CLEOPATRA is a healthcare evaluation study using clinical and imaging data from multiple, prospective EVT trials and registries in both the earlier and later time windows. To study the long-term health and cost effects, we will construct a ("Markov") health state transition model simulating the clinical outcome over a 5-year follow-up period for CTP-based and conventional selection for EVT. Clinical data acquired within the current study and estimates from the literature will be used as input for probabilities of events, costs, and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) per modified Rankin Scale (mRS) subscore. Primary outcome for the cost-effectiveness analysis will be the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) in terms of costs per QALY gained over the simulated follow-up period. Study outcomes: Outcome measures will be reported as cumulative values over a 5-year follow-up period. Discussion: This study will provide preliminary insight into costs and health effects of including CTP in the selection for EVT for AIS patients, presenting between 0 and 24 h after time last known well. The results may be used to develop recommendations and inform further implementation projects and studies. Show less
Background Pre-stroke dependent patients (modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) >= 3) were excluded from most trials on endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in the anterior... Show moreBackground Pre-stroke dependent patients (modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) >= 3) were excluded from most trials on endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in the anterior circulation. Therefore, little evidence exists for EVT in those patients. We aimed to investigate the safety and benefit of EVT in pre-stroke patients with mRS score 3. Methods We used data from the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN) Registry. All patients treated with EVT for anterior circulation AIS with pre-stroke mRS 3 were included. We assessed causes for dependence and compared patients with successful reperfusion (defined as expanded Thrombolysis in Cerebral Ischemia scale (eTICI) 2b-3) to patients without successful reperfusion. We used regression analyses with pre-specified adjustments. Our primary outcome was 90-day mRS 0-3 (functional improvement or return to baseline). Results A total of 192 patients were included, of whom 82 (43%) had eTICI <2b and 108 (56%) eTICI >= 2b. The median age was 80 years (IQR 73-87). Fifty-one of the 192 patients (27%) suffered from previous stroke and 36/192 (19%) had cardiopulmonary disease. Patients with eTICI >= 2b more often returned to their baseline functional state or improved (n=26 (26%) vs n=15 (19%); adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.91 (95% CI 1.08 to 7.82)) and had lower mortality rates (n=49 (49%) vs n=50 (64%); aOR 0.42 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.93)) compared with patients with eTICI Conclusions Although patients with AIS with pre-stroke mRS 3 comprise a heterogenous group of disability causes, we observed improved outcomes when patients achieved successful reperfusion after EVT. 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
Es, A.C.G.M. van; Hunfeld, M.A.W.; Wijngaard, I. van den; Kraemer, U.; Engelen, M.; Hasselt, B.A.A.M. van; ... ; MR CLEAN Registry Investigators 2021
Background and Purpose:Multiple trials have shown the efficacy and safety of endovascular therapy (EVT) of acute ischemic stroke in adults. Trials in children are lacking and only case reports and... Show moreBackground and Purpose:Multiple trials have shown the efficacy and safety of endovascular therapy (EVT) of acute ischemic stroke in adults. Trials in children are lacking and only case reports and case series exist. However, the long-term outcome of children with acute ischemic stroke can be devastating with significant mortality and morbidity. In this study, we describe the safety and efficacy of EVT in children with anterior circulation acute ischemic stroke who were included in the MR CLEAN Registry (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands).Methods:Patients under the age of 18 years who were treated with EVT for acute ischemic stroke between March 2014 and July 2017 were retrospectively reviewed up to 6 months after EVT. Nine children, aged 13 months to 16 years (median 14 years, interquartile range, 3-15 years), underwent EVT. Stroke cause was thromboembolism in children with end-stage heart failure on left ventricular assist device (4 of these 9 cases). Median time from onset to imaging was 133 minutes. Four children received intravenous alteplase before EVT, with median onset to needle time of 165 minutes. In all but one patient, EVT was technically successful. No major periprocedural complications occurred.Results:At 24 hours after EVT, 3 children completely recovered and 4 children showed partial recovery (median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, 3.5), whereas 2 patients on left ventricular assist device died within the first week due to the occurrence of multiple strokes. One patient on left ventricular assist device developed a fatal massive intracranial hemorrhage and another child died due to left ventricular assist device-related complications. Among the 5 stroke survivors, all had a favorable outcome (modified Rankin Scale score, 0-2) at 6 months follow-up.Conclusions:EVT of children with acute ischemic stroke seems safe and feasible. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution as more and larger studies are needed to clarify the trade-off between risks and benefits of this treatment. Show less
Background and Purpose-The use of oral anticoagulants (OAC) is considered a contra-indication for intravenous thrombolytics as acute treatment of ischemic stroke. However, little is known about the... Show moreBackground and Purpose-The use of oral anticoagulants (OAC) is considered a contra-indication for intravenous thrombolytics as acute treatment of ischemic stroke. However, little is known about the risks and benefits of endovascular treatment in patients on prior OAC. We aim to compare outcomes after endovascular treatment between patients with and without prior use of OAC.Methods-Data of patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by an intracranial anterior circulation occlusion, included in the nationwide, prospective, MR CLEAN Registry between March 2014 and November 2017, were analyzed. Outcomes of interest included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and functional outcome at 90 days (modified Rankin Scale score). Outcomes between groups were compared with (ordinal) logistic regression analyses, adjusted for prognostic factors.Results-Three thousand one hundred sixty-two patients were included in this study, of whom 502 (16%) used OAC. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage between patients with and without prior OACs (5% versus 6%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.38-1.06]). Patients on OACs had worse functional outcomes than patients without OACs (common odds ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.47-0.66]). However, this observed difference in functional outcome disappeared after adjustment for prognostic factors (adjusted common odds ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.74-1.13]).Conclusions-Prior OAC use in patients treated with endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke is not associated with an increased risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage or worse functional outcome compared with no prior OAC use. Therefore, prior OAC use should not be a contra-indication for endovascular treatment. Show less
