Background and Purpose Safety and efficacy of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in patients with mild stroke syndromes is unclear, especially in distal vessel occlusions. Methods We analysed in our stroke database (HeiReKa) between 2002 and April 2019 safety and efficacy of EVT compared to intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in patients with occlusions distal to the M1 segment of the middle cerebral artery and the top of the basilar artery who presented with a National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) below 6. Excellent (good) outcome was defined as modified rankin scale (mRS) 0-1 (0-2) or return to baseline mRS (good) after 3 months. Safety endpoints were mortality after 3 months and intracranial hemorrhage according to the Heidelberg Bleeding Classification (HBC). Results Of 4167 patients 94 met the inclusion criteria. Sixty-four patients were allocated to the IVT group and 30 to the EVT group of which 15 also received IVT; three patients (4.6%) in the IVT group received rescue EVT. Baseline characteristics did not differ but more M2 occlusions were found in the EVT group (93.3% vs. 64.1%, p = 0.02). Intracranial bleeding occurred more often in EVT patients (HBC class 2: 13.3% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.01). Excellent and good outcome were not significantly different (75% vs. 70%, p = 0.65 and 87.5% vs. 73.3%, p = 0.14). Mortality was significantly lower in IVT patients (1.6% vs. 13.3%, p = 0.04). Conclusion Rates of excellent and good outcome after IVT or EVT were almost similar, but safety parameters were increased after EVT. EVT may be considered in selected patients after careful risk/benefit analysis.

Background and Purpose: This study assessed the predictive performance and relative importance of clinical, multimodal imaging, and angiographic characteristics for predicting the clinical outcome of endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke. Methods: A consecutive series of 246 patients with acute ischemic stroke and large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation who underwent endovascular treatment between April 2014 and January 2018 was analyzed. Clinical, conventional imaging (electronic Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score, acute ischemic volume, site of vessel occlusion, and collateral score), and advanced imaging characteristics (CT-perfusion with quantification of ischemic penumbra and infarct core volumes) before treatment as well as angiographic (interval groin puncture-recanalization, modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score) and postinterventional clinical (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score after 24 hours) and imaging characteristics (electronic Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score, final infarction volume after 18–36 hours) were assessed. The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days (mRS-90) was used to measure patient outcome (favorable outcome: mRS-90 ≤2 versus unfavorable outcome: mRS-90 >2). Machine-learning with gradient boosting classifiers was used to assess the performance and relative importance of the extracted characteristics for predicting mRS-90. Results: Baseline clinical and conventional imaging characteristics predicted mRS-90 with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.740 (95% CI, 0.733–0.747) and an accuracy of 0.711 (95% CI, 0.705–0.717). Advanced imaging with CT-perfusion did not improved the predictive performance (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve, 0.747 [95% CI, 0.740–0.755]; accuracy, 0.720 [95% CI, 0.714–0.727]; P =0.150). Further inclusion of angiographic and postinterventional characteristics significantly improved the predictive performance (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve, 0.856 [95% CI, 0.850–0.861]; accuracy, 0.804 [95% CI, 0.799–0.810]; P <0.001). The most important parameters for predicting mRS 90 were National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score after 24 hours (importance =100%), premorbid mRS score (importance =44%) and final infarction volume on postinterventional CT after 18 to 36 hours (importance =32%). Conclusions: Integrative assessment of clinical, multimodal imaging, and angiographic characteristics with machine-learning allowed to accurately predict the clinical outcome following endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke. Thereby, premorbid mRS was the most important clinical predictor for mRS-90, and the final infarction volume was the most important imaging predictor, while the extent of hemodynamic impairment on CT-perfusion before treatment had limited importance.

Background and purpose Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) and acute carotid stenting (ACS) of patients with acute ischemic stroke due to tandem occlusions (TO) of the anterior circulation was proven to be safe and effective, but the implications of periprocedural antithrombotic medications are only known to a limited extent. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of 162 consecutive patients who presented with TO and were treated with MT and ACS in our center. Patients initially either received dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT) or tirofiban periprocedurally. Some patients were also treated with unfractionated heparin. The frequency of intracranial hemorrhages (ICH), as well as the impact on clinical outcome and stent patency of different medical regimes, were evaluated using univariate tests and adjusted multivariate logistic regressions. Results Patients who received supportive treatment with heparin had significantly higher occurrences of any (OR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.15 to 5.28) and symptomatic ICH (OR, 3.71; 95% CI, 1.18 to 14.95). Additionally, these patients were less likely to have a moderate clinical outcome after 90 days (modified Rankin scale 0–3; OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.72), but were more likely to have a fatal outcome after 90 days (OR, 2.84; 95% CI 1.10 to 7.31). These findings persisted in patients who received both DAT and heparin, but not for patients who received both tirofiban and heparin. Conclusion Supportive administration of heparin in patients with TO and treatment with MT and ACS should be carefully considered, especially in patients who primarily receive DAT.

Background: Widespread quick access to mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is one of the main challenges in stroke care. It is unclear if newly established MT units are required 24 h/7 d. We explored the diurnal admission rate of patients with AIS potentially eligible for MT to provide a basis for discussion of daytime-adapted stroke care concepts. Methods: Data collected from the Baden-Württemberg Stroke Registry in Germany were assessed (2008-2012). We analyzed the admission rate of patients with AIS stratified by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score at admission in 3-h intervals. An NIHSS score ≥10 was considered a predictor of large vessel occlusion. The average annual admission number of patients with severe AIS were stratified by stroke service level and calculated for a three-shift model and working/non-working hours. Results: Of 91,864, 22,527 (21%) presented with an NIHSS score ≥10. The average admission rates per year for a hospital without Stroke Unit (SU), with a local SU, with a regional SU and a stroke center were 8, 52, 90 and 178, respectively. Approximately 61% were admitted during working hours, 54% in the early shift, 36% in the late shift and 10% in the night shift. Conclusions: A two-shift model, excluding the night shift, would cover 90% of the patients with severe AIS. A model with coverage during working hours would miss ~40% of the patients with severe AIS. To achieve a quick and area-wide MT, it seems preferable for newly implemented MT-units to offer MT in a two-shift model at a minimum.

Background and Purpose- NEUROSQUAD (Stroke Treatment: Quality and Efficacy in Different Referral Systems) is a prospective, observational, bi-center study comparing 3 triage pathways in endovascular stroke treatment: mothership (MS), drip and ship (DS) and transferring a neurointerventionalist to a remote hospital for thrombectomy (drive the doctor [DD]). Methods- Between February and October 2018, all stroke patients undergoing thrombectomy at 2 university hospitals and 2 associated remote hospitals were included. Primary outcome measures were time from onset to groin puncture and time from imaging to groin puncture. Secondary outcome measures were time from onset to imaging and time from onset to thrombolysis. Results- In total, 440 patients were included (mothership 32.3%, DS 55.9%, DD 11.8%). Median time from onset to groin puncture (168 minutes) and time from imaging to groin puncture (51 minutes) were the shortest in the mothership group. Time from onset to groin puncture (DD median 225 versus DS median 300 minutes; P=0.001) and time from imaging to groin puncture (DD median 118 versus DS median 172 minutes; P<0.001) were shorter in the DD group compared with DS. Time from onset to imaging was similar among mothership, DS, and DD (P=0.363). In patients receiving thrombolysis, time from onset to needle was similar among the groups (P=0.620). Conclusions- The NEUROSQUAD study adds evidence that DD may be a feasible alternative to DS, leading to shorter delay between symptom onset and groin puncture. Both are time-wise inferior compared with mothership, though.

Selection of treatments to fit the specific needs for a certain patient is one major challenge in modern medicine. Personalized treatments rely on established patient–treatment interactions. In recent years, various statistical methods for the identification and estimation of interactions between relevant covariates and treatment were proposed. In this article, different available methods for detection and estimation of a covariate–treatment interaction for a time-to-event outcome, namely the standard Cox regression model assuming a linear interaction, the fractional polynomials approach for interaction, the modified outcome approach, the local partial-likelihood approach, and STEPP (Subpopulation Treatment Effect Pattern Plots) were applied to data from the SPACE trial, a randomized clinical trial comparing stent-protected angioplasty (CAS) to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with symptomatic stenosis, with the aim to analyse the interaction between age and treatment. Time from primary intervention to the first relevant event (any stroke or death) was considered as outcome parameter. The analyses suggest a qualitative interaction between patient age and treatment indicating a lower risk after treatment with CAS compared to CEA for younger patients, while for elderly patients a lower risk after CEA was observed. Differences in the statistical methods regarding the observed results, applicability, and interpretation are discussed.

Background and Purpose— We investigated whether procedural stroke or death risk of carotid artery stenting (CAS) compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is different in patients with and without history of coronary heart disease (CHD) and whether the treatment-specific impact of age differs. Methods— We combined individual patient data of 4754 patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis from 4 randomized trials (EVA-3S [Endarterectomy Versus Angioplasty in Patients With Symptomatic Severe Carotid Stenosis], SPACE [Stent-Protected Angioplasty Versus Carotid Endarterectomy], ICSS [International Carotid Stenting Study], and CREST [Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial]). Procedural risk was defined as any stroke or death ≤30 days after treatment. We compared procedural risk between both treatments with Cox regression analysis, stratified by history of CHD and age (<70, 70–74, ≥75 years). History of CHD included myocardial infarction, angina, or coronary revascularization. Results— One thousand two hundred ninety-three (28%) patients had history of CHD. Procedural stroke or death risk was higher in patients with history of CHD. Procedural risk in patients treated with CAS compared with CEA was consistent in patients with history of CHD (8.3% versus 4.6%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.96; 95% CI, 0.67–5.73) and in those without (6.9% versus 3.6%; HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.40–2.65; P interaction =0.89). In patients with history of CHD, procedural risk was significantly higher after CAS compared with CEA in patients aged ≥75 (CAS-to-CEA HR, 2.78; 95% CI, 1.32–5.85), but not in patients aged <70 (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 0.79–3.71) and 70 to 74 years (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.45–2.65). In contrast, in patients without history of CHD, procedural risk after CAS was higher in patients aged 70 to 74 (HR, 3.62; 95% CI, 1.80–7.29) and ≥75 years (HR, 2.64; 95% CI, 1.52–4.59), but equal in patients aged <70 years (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.63–1.73; 3-way P interaction =0.09). Conclusions— History of CHD does not modify procedural stroke or death risk of CAS compared with CEA. CAS might be as safe as CEA in patients with history of CHD aged <75 years, whereas for patients without history of CHD, risk after CAS compared with CEA was only equal in those aged <70 years.

Background and Purpose— There are limited data on intravenous thrombolysis treatment in patients with ischemic stroke who have received prophylactic doses of low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs). We aimed to evaluate the safety and outcomes of intravenous thrombolysis treatment in stroke patients taking thromboprophylactic doses of LMWH. Methods— We analyzed 109 291patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis, recorded in the Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke International Thrombolysis Register between 2003 and 2017 not taking oral anticoagulants or therapeutic doses of heparin at stroke onset. One thousand four hundred eleven patients (1.3%) were on prophylactic LMWH for deep venous thrombosis prevention. Outcome measures were symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, parenchymal hematoma, death within 7 days and 3 months, and functional dependency at 3 months. Results— Patients on LMWH were older, had more severe strokes, more prestroke disability, and comorbidities than patients without LMWH. There was no significant increase in adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (aOR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.48–2.17] as per Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke -MOST, aOR, 0.95 [0.59–1.53] per ECASS II]), nor for 7-day mortality (aOR, 1.14 [0.82–1.59]), in the prophylactic LMWH group. The LMWH group had a higher aOR for 3-month mortality (aOR, 1.94 [1.49–2.53]) and functional dependency, aOR, 1.44 (1.10–1.90). Propensity score analysis matching patients on baseline characteristics removed differences between groups on all outcomes except 3-month mortality. Conclusions— Intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke on treatment with prophylactic doses of LMWH at stroke onset is not associated with an increased risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage or early death.

Background and Purpose- This analysis was performed to assess the association between perioperative and clinical variables and the 30-day risk of stroke or death after carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. Methods- Individual patient-level data from the 5 largest randomized controlled carotid trials were pooled in the Carotid Stenosis Trialists' Collaboration database. A total of 4181 patients who received carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic stenosis per protocol were included. Determinants of outcome included carotid endarterectomy technique, type of anesthesia, intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring, shunting, antiplatelet medication, and clinical variables. Stroke or death within 30 days after carotid endarterectomy was the primary outcome. Adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) were estimated in multilevel multivariable analyses using a Poisson regression model. Results- Mean age was 69.5±9.2 years (70.7% men). The 30-day stroke or death rate was 4.3%. In the multivariable regression analysis, local anesthesia was associated with a lower primary outcome rate (versus general anesthesia; aRR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.50-0.99]). Shunting (aRR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.05-1.95]), a contralateral high-grade carotid stenosis or occlusion (aRR, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.02-2.47]), and a more severe neurological deficit (mRS, 3-5 versus 0-2: aRR, 2.51 [95% CI, 1.30-4.83]) were associated with higher primary outcome rates. None of the other characteristics were significantly associated with the perioperative stroke or death risk. Conclusions- The current results indicate lower perioperative stroke or death rates in patients operated upon under local anesthesia, whereas a more severe neurological deficit and a contralateral high-grade carotid stenosis or occlusion were identified as potential risk factors. Despite a possible selection bias and patients not having been randomized, these findings might be useful to guide surgeons and anesthetists when treating patients with symptomatic carotid disease.

Introduction: A 3.4% (95% CI: 2.1% to 4.7%) higher peri-procedural stroke and death risk has been previously documented for those treated with carotid artery stenting (CAS) relative to those treated with carotid endarterectomy (CEA). However, the CAS versus CEA treatment differences in long-term outcomes and the post-procedure durability have not been described. Methods: Data from the 4 largest CAS-versus-CEA randomized trials for treatment of symptomatic carotid atherosclerosis (EVA-3S, SPACE, ICSS, and CREST) were pooled, and treatment differences assessed for the outcome of any stroke or death during a 120-day peri-procedural period, plus ipsilateral stroke afterward. Results: Long-term follow-up was analysed for 4754 patients. Median length of follow-up across the studies ranged from 2.0 to 6.9 years, with 88 peri-procedural and 55 post-procedural events among those CEA-treated, and 169 and 64 for those CAS-treated. After the peri-procedural period, the annual rates of stroke following CAS was 0.6% (95% CI: 0.5 to 0.8) and following CEA 0.6% (95% CI: 0.5 to 0.8), resulting in non-significant durability differences of less than 1% over the period extending up to 9 years (see Table). The previously-documented 3.4% higher peri-procedural event rate in the CAS group contributed to a significant 3.1% (95% CI: 1.6% to 4.7%) treatment difference at 1-year, and the aforementioned similar durability implied that this significant difference remained relatively constant over the period extending up to 9 years (see table). Conclusions: The post-procedure durability of CAS and CEA were similar, both with event rates below 1%. The similarity of post-procedure events rates implies that the previously-documented higher peri-procedural in the CAS group is “carried forward” with a higher risk of outcomes extending to 9-years.

Background and Purpose: Renal dysfunction (RD) is overall associated with unfavorable functional outcome and higher risk of mortality after acute ischemic stroke. Associations between RD and outcome in patients with acute vertebrobasilar stroke treated with thrombectomy have not been evaluated so far. Materials and Methods: Consecutive patients with vertebrobasilar stroke treated with mechanical thrombectomy between October 2010 and July 2017 at our center were analyzed. RD was defined as glomerular filtration rate (GFR) < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 at admission. Endpoints were (I) poor clinical outcome (modified Rankin Scale > 2) at 3 months, (II) 3-month mortality, and (III) intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) after treatment. Results: Overall, 106 patients were included. Median age was 73.0 years (interquartile range 62.0–80.0), and RD was present in 20.8%. Multivariate analysis revealed that RD was associated with a higher risk for any ICH (OR 3.54; 95% CI 1.09–11.49; p = 0.035). Stroke severity at onset predicted poor clinical outcome (OR 1.08; 95% CI 1.03–1.14; p = 0.003). Neither low GFR nor any ICH, but stroke severity (OR 1.08; 95% CI 1.03–1.14; p = 0.002) and poor recanalization results (OR 11.38; 95% CI 2.01–64.41; p = 0.006) were associated with a higher risk for mortality. Conclusions: Patients with RD and acute vertebrobasilar stroke should be thoroughly monitored to prevent ICH after thrombectomy. Our results support performing mechanical thrombectomy in acute stroke patients with large vessel occlusions of the posterior circulation, irrespective of their renal function.

Background and Purpose— Outcome after mechanical thrombectomy for ischemic stroke may be influenced by blood pressure (BP). This study aims to assess the association of BP changes during general anesthesia versus conscious sedation with functional outcome after mechanical thrombectomy. Methods— SIESTA (Sedation vs Intubation for Endovascular Stroke Treatment) was a monocentric randomized trial of general anesthesia versus conscious sedation during mechanical thrombectomy involving BP target protocols. In this post hoc analysis, BP measurements were divided into 4 phases: preintervention, prerecanalization, postrecanalization, and postintervention. We examined the association between BP and functional outcomes (defined by improvement of 24-hour National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] and 3-month modified Rankin Scale). Results— We found no association between the difference in systolic BP, diastolic BP, and mean arterial pressure from baseline to the different phases of intervention and NIHSS change after 24 hours. Only baseline diastolic BP was associated with a reduced improvement in NIHSS (β=0.17, P <0.01). There was no association of BP drops with a change in modified Rankin Scale at 3 months. About sedation, only baseline mean arterial pressure preintervention revealed significant associations (β=0.16, P <0.01) with less change in 24-hour NIHSS in conscious sedation group. Otherwise, there was no association for differences of any of the BP measurements with a change in 24-hour NIHSS and long-term functional outcome either in general anesthesia or the conscious sedation group when analyzed separately, consistent with our findings in the entire cohort. Doses of propofol (β=0.84, P =0.04) and norepinephrine (β=1.87, P =0.01) administered during intervention before recanalization were associated with reduced improvement of NIHSS at 24 hours. Conclusions— In a setting, where both sedation regimes general anesthesia and conscious sedation were performed according to strict protocols directed at avoiding BP extremes, our findings suggest that peri-interventional BP drops were not associated with either early neurological improvement or long-term functional outcome. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02126085.

Background and purpose Carotid artery stenting is an alternative to endarterectomy for the treatment of symptomatic carotid stenosis but was associated with a higher risk of procedural stroke or death in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Technical aspects of treatment may partly explain these results. The purpose of this analysis was to investigate the influence of technical aspects such as stent design or the use of protection devices, as well as clinical variables, on procedural risk. Methods We pooled data of 1557 individual patients receiving stent treatment in three large RCTs comparing stenting versus endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. The primary outcome event was any procedural stroke or death occurring within 30 days after stenting. Results Procedural stroke or death occurred significantly more often with the use of open-cell stents (61/595 patients, 10.3%) than with closed-cell stents (58/962 patients, 6.0%; RR 1.76; 95% CI 1.23 to 2.52; P=0.002). Procedural stroke or death occurred in 76/950 patients (8.0%) treated with protection devices (predominantly distal filters) and in 43/607 (7.1%) treated without protection devices (RR 1.10; 95% CI 0.71 to 1.70; P=0.67). Clinical variables predicting the primary outcome event were age, severity of the qualifying event, history of prior stroke, and level of disability at baseline. The effect of stent design remained similar after adjustment for these variables. Conclusions In symptomatic carotid stenosis, the use of stents with a closed-cell design is independently associated with a lower risk of procedural stroke or death compared with open-cell stents. Filter-type protection devices do not appear to reduce procedural risk.

Aims Evidence is lacking regarding acute anticoagulation management in patients after intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) with implanted mechanical heart valves (MHVs). Our objective was to investigate anticoagulation reversal and resumption strategies by evaluating incidences of haemorrhagic and thromboembolic complications, thereby defining an optimal time-window when to restart therapeutic anticoagulation (TA) in patients with MHV and ICH. Methods and results We pooled individual patient- data (n = 2504) from a nationwide multicentre cohort-study (RETRACE, conducted at 22 German centres) and eventually identified MHV-patients (n = 137) with anticoagulation-associated ICH for outcome analyses. The primary outcome consisted of major haemorrhagic complications analysed during hospital stay according to treatment exposure (restarted TA vs. no-TA). Secondary outcomes comprised thromboembolic complications, the composite outcome (haemorrhagic and thromboembolic complications), timing of TA, and mortality. Adjusted analyses involved propensity-score matching and multivariable cox-regressions to identify optimal timing of TA. In 66/137 (48%) of patients TA was restarted, being associated with increased haemorrhagic (TA = 17/66 (26%) vs. no-TA = 4/71 (6%); P < 0.01) and a trend to decreased thromboembolic complications (TA = 1/66 (2%) vs. no-TA = 7/71 (10%); P = 0.06). Controlling treatment crossovers provided an incidence rate-ratio [hazard ratio (HR) 10.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.67-35.70; P < 0.01] in disadvantage of TA for haemorrhagic complications. Analyses of TA-timing displayed significant harm until Day 13 after ICH (HR 7.06, 95% CI 2.33-21.37; P < 0.01). The hazard for the composite-balancing both complications, was increased for restarted TA until Day 6 (HR 2.51, 95% CI 1.10-5.70; P = 0.03). Conclusion Restarting TA within less than 2 weeks after ICH in patients with MHV was associated with increased haemorrhagic complications. Optimal weighing-between least risks for thromboembolic and haemorrhagic complications-provided an earliest starting point of TA at Day 6, reserved only for patients at high thromboembolic risk.

Objective: Do asymptomatic restenoses > 70% after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) increase the risk of late ipsilateral stroke?Methods: Systematic review identified 11 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting rates of restenosis > 70% (and/or occlusion) in patients who had undergone CEA/CAS for the treatment of primary atherosclerotic disease, and nine RCTs reported late ipsilateral stroke rates. Proportional meta-analyses and odds ratios (OR) at end of follow-up were performed.Results: The weighted incidence of restenosis > 70% was 5.8% after "any" CEA, median 47 months (11 RCTs; 4249 patients); 4.1% after patched CEA, median 32 months (5 RCTs; 1078 patients), and 10% after CAS, median 62 months (5 RCTs; 2716 patients). In four RCTs (1964 patients), one of 125 (0.8%) with restenosis > 70% (or occlusion) after CAS suffered late ipsilateral stroke over a median 50 months, compared with 37 of 1839 (2.0%) in CAS patients with no significant restenosis (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.24-3.21; p = .8339). In seven RCTs (2810 patients), 13 out of 141 (9.2%) with restenosis > 70% (or occlusion) after CEA suffered late ipsilateral stroke over a median 37 months, compared with 33 out of 2669 (1.2%) in patients with no significant restenoses (OR 9.02; 95% CI 4.70-17.28; p <.0001). Following data correction to exclude patients whose surveillance scan showed no evidence of restenosis > 70% before stroke onset, the prevalence of stroke ipsilateral to an untreated asymptomatic > 70% restenosis was seven out of 135 (5.2%) versus 40 out of 2704 (1.5%) in CEA patients with no significant restenosis (OR 4.77; 95% CI 2.29-9.92).Conclusions: CAS patients with untreated asymptomatic > 70% restenosis had an extremely low rate of late ipsilateral stroke (0.8% over 50 months). CEA patients with untreated, asymptomatic > 70% restenosis had a significantly higher risk of late ipsilateral stroke (compared with patients with no restenosis), but this was only 5% at 37 months. Overall, 97% of all late ipsilateral strokes after CAS and 85% after CEA occurred in patierits without evidence of significant restenosis or occlusion. (C) 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Importance Optimal management of sedation and airway during thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke is controversial due to lack of evidence from randomized trials. Objective To assess whether conscious sedation is superior to general anesthesia for early neurological improvement among patients receiving stroke thrombectomy. Design, Setting, and Participants SIESTA (Sedation vs Intubation for Endovascular Stroke Treatment), a single-center, randomized, parallel-group, open-label treatment trial with blinded outcome evaluation conducted at Heidelberg University Hospital in Germany (April 2014-February 2016) included 150 patients with acute ischemic stroke in the anterior circulation, higher National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score (>10), and isolated/combined occlusion at any level of the internal carotid or middle cerebral artery. Intervention Patients were randomly assigned to an intubated general anesthesia group (n = 73) or a nonintubated conscious sedation group (n = 77) during stroke thrombectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome was early neurological improvement on the NIHSS after 24 hours (0-42 [none to most severe neurological deficits; a 4-point difference considered clinically relevant]). Secondary outcomes were functional outcome by modified Rankin Scale (mRS) after 3 months (0-6 [symptom free to dead]), mortality, and peri-interventional parameters of feasibility and safety. Results Among 150 patients (60 women [40%]; mean age, 71.5 years; median NIHSS score, 17), primary outcome was not significantly different between the general anesthesia group (mean NIHSS score, 16.8 at admission vs 13.6 after 24 hours; difference, -3.2 points [95% CI, -5.6 to -0.8]) vs the conscious sedation group (mean NIHSS score, 17.2 at admission vs 13.6 after 24 hour; difference, -3.6 points [95% CI, -5.5 to -1.7]); mean difference between groups, -0.4 (95% CI, -3.4 to 2.7; P = .82). Of 47 prespecified secondary outcomes analyzed, 41 showed no significant differences. In the general anesthesia vs the conscious sedation group, substantial patient movement was less frequent (0% vs 9.1%; difference, 9.1%; P = .008), but postinterventional complications were more frequent for hypothermia (32.9% vs 9.1%; P < .001), delayed extubation (49.3% vs 6.5%; P < .001), and pneumonia (13.7% vs 3.9%; P = .03). More patients were functionally independent (unadjusted mRS score, 0 to 2 after 3 months [37.0% in the general anesthesia group vs 18.2% in the conscious sedation group P = .01]). There were no differences in mortality at 3 months (24.7% in both groups). Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with acute ischemic stroke in the anterior circulation undergoing thrombectomy, conscious sedation vs general anesthesia did not result in greater improvement in neurological status at 24 hours. The study findings do not support an advantage for the use of conscious sedation. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02126085.

Mechanical thrombectomy with stent retrievers is an effective treatment for patients with ischemic stroke. Results of recent meta-analyses report that the treatment is safe. However, the endpoints recurrent stroke, vasospasms, and subarachnoid hemorrhage have not been evaluated sufficiently. Hence, we extracted data on these outcomes from the five recent thrombectomy trials (MR CLEAN, ESCAPE, REVASCAT, SWIFT PRIME, and EXTEND IA published in 2015). Subsequently, we conducted meta-analyses for each outcome. We report the results of the fixed, as well as the random effects model. Three studies reported data on recurrent strokes. While the results did not reach statistical significance in the random effects model (despite a three times elevated risk), the fixed effects model revealed a significantly higher rate of recurrent strokes after thrombectomy. Four studies reported data on subarachnoid hemorrhage. The higher pooled rates in the intervention groups were statistically significant in both, the fixed and the random effects model. One study reported on vasospasms. We recorded 14 events in the intervention group and none in the control group. The efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy is not questioned, yet our results indicate an increased risk for recurrent strokes, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and vasospasms post-treatment. Therefore, we strongly recommend a thoroughly surveillance, concerning these adverse events in future clinical trials and routine registries.

BACKGROUND:Prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs) are frequently used to reverse the effect of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). However, information on the rate of thromboembolic events (TEs) and allergic events after PCC therapy in VKA-ICH patients is limited.METHODS:Consecutive VKA-ICH patients treated with PCC at our institution between December 2004 and June 2014 were included into this retrospective observational study. We recorded international normalized ratio (INR) values before and after PCC treatment, baseline clinical characteristics including the premorbid modified Rankin Scale (pmRS) score, TE and allergic event that occurred during the hospital stay. All events were classified by 3 reviewers as being 'related', 'probably related', 'possibly related', 'unlikely related' or 'not related' to treatment with PCC. To identify factors associated with TEs, log-rank analyses were applied.RESULTS:Two hundred and five patients were included. Median INR was 2.8 (interquartile range (IQR) 2.2-3.8) before and 1.3 (IQR 1.2-1.4) after PCC treatment and a median of 1,500 IU PCC (IQR 1,000-2,500) was administered. Nineteen TEs were observed (9.3%); none were classified 'related' but 9 were classified as 'possibly' or 'probably related' to PCC infusion (4.4%). One allergic reaction (0.5%), 'unlikely related' to PCC, was observed. In the whole cohort, PCC doses >2,000-3,000 IU, ICH volumes >40 ml, National Institute of Health Stroke Scale values >10 and a pmRS >2 were associated with the development of TEs (p = 0.031, p = 0.034, p = 0.050 and p = 0.036, respectively).CONCLUSIONS:Overall, INR reversal with PCC appears safe. Though no clear relationship between higher PCC dosing and TEs was observed, PCC doses between >2,000 and 3,000 IU and higher morbidity at ICH onset were associated with TEs. Hence, individual titration of PCC to avoid exposure to unnecessarily high doses using point-of-care devices should be prospectively explored.

Background: While the precise timing and intensity of very early rehabilitation (VER) after stroke onset is still under discussion, its beneficial effect on functional disability is generally accepted. The recently published randomized controlled AVERT trial indicated that patients with severe stroke might be more susceptible to harmful side effects of VER, which we hypothesized is contrary to current clinical practice. We analyzed the Baden-Wuerttemberg stroke registry to gain insight into the application of VER in acute ischemic stroke (IS) and intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) in clinical practice.Methods: 99,753 IS patients and 8824 patients with ICH hospitalized from January 2008 to December 2012 were analyzed. Data on the access to physical therapy (PT), occupational therapy (OT), and speech therapy (ST), the time from admission to first contact with a therapist and the average number of therapy sessions during the first 7 days of admission are reported. Multiple logistic regression models adjusted for patient and treatment characteristics were carried out to investigate the influence of VER on clinical outcome.Results: PT was applied in 90/87% (IS/ICH), OT in 63/57%, and ST in 70/65% of the study population. Therapy was mostly initiated within 24 h (PT 87/82%) or 48 h after admission (OT 91/89% and ST 93/90%). Percentages of patients under therapy and also the average number of therapy sessions were highest in those with a discharge modified Rankin Scale score of 2 to 5 and lowest in patients with complete recovery or death during hospitalization. The outcome analyses were fundamentally hindered due to biases by individual decision making regarding the application and frequency of VER.Conclusions: While most patients had access to PT we noticed an undersupply of OT and ST. Only little differences were observed between patients with IS and ICH. The staff decisions for treatment seem to reflect attempts to optimize resources. Patients with either excellent or very unfavorable prognosis were less frequently assigned to VER and, if treated, received a lower average number of therapy sessions. On the contrary, severely disabled patients received VER at high frequency, although potentially harmful according to recent indications from the randomized controlled AVERT trial.

Carotid stenosis is a risk factor of ischaemic stroke and has an increasing prevalence with age. Stroke risk under optimised medical therapy, as well as recommendations of carotid artery endarterectomy/stenting, as therapy in high risk carotid stenosis, are discussed in consideration of recent research results.