Objectives: The beneficial effect of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) on clinical outcome is assumed to be caused by reduced follow-up infarct volume (FIV), which could serve as an early imaging endpoint. However, the effect of EVT on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) was poorly explained by FIV. NIHSS at 5-7 days could be a more specific measure of the effect of reperfusion therapy, as opposed to the mRS at 3 months. Therefore, we aimed to assess to what extent the effect of EVT on NIHSS is explained by FIV. Materials and methods: We used data from the MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands; n = 500) trial to evaluate the mediating role of FIV within 1 week in the relationship between EVT and baseline adjusted NIHSS at 5-7 days. Results: Larger FIVs were associated with higher NIHSS after treatment (adjusted beta-coefficient (a13) 0.47;95%CI 0.39-0.55). EVT was associated with smaller FIVs (13 -0.35;95%CI-0.64 to -0.06) and lower NIHSS (13 -0.63;95%CI0.90 to -0.35). After adjustment for FIV, the effect of EVT on NIHSS decreased (a13 -0.47;95%CI-0.72 to -0.23), indicating that effect of EVT on neurologic deficit is partially mediated by FIV. Reduction of FIV explained 34% (95%CI;5%-93%) of the effect of EVT on the NIHSS at 5-7 days. Conclusions: Larger FIV was significantly associated with larger neurological deficits after treatment. Reduced infarct volume after EVT explains one third of treatment benefit in terms of neurological deficit. This suggests that FIV is of interest as an imaging biomarker of stroke treatment effect. (c) 2022 Published by Elsevier Inc.

IMPORTANCE Outcome prediction after endovascular treatment (EVT) for ischemic stroke is important to patients, family members, and physicians. OBJECTIVE To develop and validate a model based on preprocedural and postprocedural characteristics to predict functional outcome for individual patients after EVT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A prediction modelwas developed using individual patient data from 7 randomized clinical trials, performed between December 2010 and December 2014. The model was developed within the Highly Effective Reperfusion Evaluated in Multiple Endovascular Stroke Trials (HERMES) collaboration and external validation in data from the Dutch Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN) Registry of patients treated in clinical practice between March 2014 and November 2017. Participants included patients from multiple centers throughout different countries in Europe, North America, East Asia, and Oceania (derivation cohort), and multiple centers in the Netherlands (validation cohort). Included were adult patients with a history of ischemic stroke from an intracranial large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation who underwent EVT within 12 hours of symptom onset or last seen well. Data were last analyzed in July 2022. MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S) A total of 19 variableswere assessed by multivariable ordinal regression to predict functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score) 90 days after EVT. Variables were routinely available 1 day after EVT. Akaike information criterion (AIC) was used to optimize model fit vs model complexity. Probabilities for functional independence (mRS 0-2) and survival (mRS 0-5) were derived from the ordinal model. Model performance was expressed with discrimination (C statistic) and calibration. RESULTS A total of 781 patients (median [IQR] age, 67 [57-76] years; 414 men [53%]) constituted the derivation cohort, and 3260 patients (median [IQR] age, 72 [61-80] years; 1684 men [52%]) composed the validation cohort. Nine variables were included in the model: age, baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, prestroke mRS score, history of diabetes, occlusion location, collateral score, reperfusion grade, NIHSS score at 24 hours, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage 24 hours after EVT. External validation in the MR CLEAN Registry showed excellent discriminative ability for functional independence (C statistic, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.90-0.92) and survival (0.89; 95% CI, 0.88-0.90). The proportion of functional independence in the MR CLEAN Registry was systematically higher than predicted by the model (41% vs 34%), whereas observed and predicted survival were similar (72% vs 75%). The model was updated and implemented for clinical use. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE The prognostic tool MR PREDICTS@24H can be applied 1 day after EVT to accurately predict functional outcome for individual patients at 90 days and to provide reliable outcome expectations and personalize follow-up and rehabilitation plans. It will need further validation and updating for contemporary patients.

Background: Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) is a serious complication after endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke. We aimed to identify determinants of its occurrence and location. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from the Dutch MR CLEAN trial (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) and MR CLEAN registry. We included adult patients with a large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation who underwent endovascular treatment within 6.5 hours of stroke onset. We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses to identify determinants of overall sICH occurrence, sICH within infarcted brain tissue, and sICH outside infarcted brain tissue. Results: SICH occurred in 203 (6%) of 3313 included patients and was located within infarcted brain tissue in 50 (25%), outside infarcted brain tissue in 23 (11%), and both within and outside infarcted brain tissue in 116 (57%) patients. In 14 patients (7%), data on location were missing. Prior antiplatelet use, baseline systolic blood pressure, baseline plasma glucose levels, post-endovascular treatment modified treatment in cerebral ischemia score, and duration of procedure were associated with all outcome parameters. In addition, determinants of sICH within infarcted brain tissue included history of myocardial infarction (adjusted odds ratio, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.06–2.56]) and poor collateral score (adjusted odds ratio, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.02–1.95]), whereas determinants of sICH outside infarcted brain tissue included level of occlusion on computed tomography angiography (internal carotid artery or internal carotid artery terminus compared with M1: adjusted odds ratio, 1.79 [95% CI, 1.16–2.78]). Conclusions: Several factors, some potentially modifiable, are associated with sICH occurrence. Further studies should investigate whether modification of baseline systolic blood pressure or plasma glucose level could reduce the risk of sICH. In addition, determinants differ per location of sICH, supporting the hypothesis of varying underlying mechanisms. Registration: URL: https://www.isrctn.com/ ; Unique identifier: ISRCTN10888758.

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 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.

Introduction: Little is known about the timing of occurrence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) after endovascular therapy (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke. A better understanding could optimize in-hospital surveillance time points and duration. The aim of this study was to delineate the probability of sICH over time and to identify factors associated with its timing. Patients and methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from the Dutch MR CLEAN trial and MR CLEAN Registry. We included adult patients who underwent EVT for an anterior circulation large vessel occlusion within 6.5 h of stroke onset. In patients with sICH (defined as ICH causing an increase of ⩾4 points on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS]), univariable and multivariable linear regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with the timing of sICH. This was defined as the time between end of EVT and the time of first CT-scan on which ICH was seen as a proxy. Results: SICH occurred in 205 (6%) of 3391 included patients. Median time from end of EVT procedure to sICH detection on NCCT was 9.0 [IQR 2.9–22.5] hours, with a rapidly decreasing incidence after 24 h. None of the analyzed factors, including baseline NIHSS, intravenous alteplase treatment, and poor reperfusion at the end of the procedure were associated with the timing of sICH. Conclusion: SICHs primarily occur in the first hours after EVT, and less frequently beyond 24 h. Guidelines that recommend to perform frequent neurological assessments for at least 24 h after intravenous alteplase treatment can be applied to ischemic stroke patients treated with EVT. Keywords Ischemic stroke , endovascular therapy , symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage , timing , surveillance time points

Background Antiplatelet therapy may increase the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage after endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke but may also have a beneficial effect on functional outcome. The aim of this study is to compare safety and efficacy outcomes after endovascular treatment in patients with and without prior antiplatelet therapy. Methods We analyzed patients registered in the MR CLEAN Registry between March 2014 and November 2017, for whom data on antiplatelet therapy were available. We used propensity score nearest-neighbor matching with replacement to balance the probability of receiving prior antiplatelet therapy between the prior antiplatelet therapy and no prior antiplatelet therapy group and adjusted for baseline prognostic factors to compare these groups. Primary outcome was symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Secondary outcomes were 90-day functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale), successful reperfusion (extended thrombolysis in cerebral infarction score ≥2B) and 90-day mortality. Results Thirty percent (n = 937) of the 3154 patients were on prior antiplatelet therapy, who were matched to 477 patients not on prior antiplatelet therapy. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 74/937 (7.9%) patients on prior antiplatelet therapy and in 27/477 (5.6%) patients without prior antiplatelet therapy adjusted odds ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 0.86–2.49. No associations were found between prior antiplatelet therapy and functional outcome (adjusted common odds ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.65–1.16), successful reperfusion (adjusted odds ratio 1.23, 95% confidence interval 0.77–1.97), or 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.86–1.54). Conclusion We found no evidence of an association of prior antiplatelet therapy with the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage after endovascular treatment, nor on functional outcome, reperfusion, or mortality. A substantial beneficial or detrimental effect of antiplatelet therapy on clinical outcome cannot be excluded. A randomized clinical trial comparing antiplatelet therapy versus no antiplatelet therapy is needed.

Health-care professionals and researchers have a legal and ethical responsibility to inform patients before carrying out diagnostic tests or treatment interventions as part of a clinical study. Interventional research in emergency situations can involve patients with some degree of acute cognitive impairment, as is regularly the case in traumatic brain injury and ischaemic stroke. These patients or their proxies are often unable to provide informed consent within narrow therapeutic time windows. International regulations and national laws are criticised for being inconclusive or restrictive in providing solutions. Currently accepted consent alternatives are deferred consent, exception from consent, or waiver of consent. However, these alternatives appear under-utilised despite being ethically permissible, socially acceptable, and regulatorily compliant. We anticipate that, when the requirements for medical urgency are properly balanced with legal and ethical conduct, the increased use of these alternatives has the potential to improve the efficiency and quality of future emergency interventional studies in patients with an inability to provide informed consent.

Introduction Deferral of consent for participation in a clinical study is a relatively novel procedure, in which informed consent is obtained after randomisation and study treatment. Deferred consent can be used in emergency situations, where small therapeutic time windows limit possibilities for patients to provide informed consent. We aimed to investigate patients’ or their proxies’ experiences and opinions regarding deferred consent in acute stroke randomised trials. Patients and methods For this qualitative study, Dutch Collaboration for New Treatments of Acute Stroke (CONTRAST) trial participants were selected. Study participants were either patients or their proxies who provided consent and were selected with theoretical sampling based on patient characteristics. Semi-structured interviews were conducted face-to-face or by telephone. Themes and subthemes were iteratively defined. Results Twenty of the 23 interviewed participants (16 patients and 7 proxies) considered deferred consent acceptable. The received study treatment and consent conversation were remembered by 18 participations, although the concept of randomisation and treatment comparison were generally not well understood. Sixteen participants felt capable of overseeing the decision to give deferred consent. Distress in the first days after stroke, lack of understanding and neurological deficits were reasons for feeling incapable of providing consent. Four participants would have preferred a different timing of the consent conversation, of whom two prior to treatment. Conclusion Our study found that deferred consent was considered acceptable by most study participants who provided consent for acute stroke randomised trials. Though they felt capable, the recall and comprehension of consent were overall limited.

Introduction: Intracranial hemorrhage after acute ischemic stroke patients manifests as natural progression or as a complication of treatment with potential subsequent neurological deterioration. Currently it is unclear whether these hemorrhagic transformations (HT) contribute to the poorer functional outcomes observed in patients with large infarcts. The purpose of this study is to assess the association of HT with follow-up infarct volume (FIV) and functional outcome at 90 days after AIS. Additionally, we determined whether the development of HT was associated with a diminished endovascular therapy (EVT) effect. Methods: All patients from the HERMES collaboration with follow-up imaging were included. HERMES is pooled data from seven randomized controlled trials that assessed the efficacy and safety of EVT compared to usual care. Patients with HT were identified according to the ECASS classification and FIV was assessed on CT or MRI. Infarct and hemorrhage were included in the FIV. We assessed functional outcome using the modified Rankin Scale 90 days after stroke onset. Ordinal logistic regression with adjustment for potential confounders was used to determine the association of HT and FIV with functional outcome. Results: Of all included patients with follow-up imaging (n=1665), 42% had HT (n=698). Before and after adjustment for confounders HT and FIV were associated with a shift in the direction of poorer functional outcome (aOR:0.71,95%CI:0.58-0.86 and aOR:0.99,95%CI:0.99-0.99). EVT was beneficial in patients with and without HT, but effect was greater in patients without (aOR:1.70,95%CI:1.27-2.28 vs. aOR:2.51,95%CI:1.97-3.20)(figure 1.) Conclusions: In this analysis, patients with HT after AIS were less likely to have good functional outcome compared to those without HT, independent of the FIV. While the EVT effect was slightly diminished in patients who developed HT, EVT was always of significant benefit.

Background and Purpose- The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 3 months is the most commonly used primary outcome measure in stroke treatment trials, but it lacks specificity and requires long-term follow-up interviews, which consume time and resources. An alternative may be the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), early after stroke. Our aim was to evaluate whether the NIHSS assessed within 1 week after treatment could serve as a primary outcome measure for trials of acute treatment for ischemic stroke. Methods- We used data from 2 randomized controlled trials of endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke: the positive MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands; N=500) and the neutral IMS (Interventional Management of Stroke) III trial (N=656). We used a causal mediation model, with linear and ordinal logistic regression adjusted for confounders, to evaluate the NIHSS 24 hours and 5 to 7 days after endovascular treatment as primary outcome measures (instead of the mRS at 3 months) in both trials. Patients who had died before the NIHSS was assessed received the maximum score of 42. NIHSS+1 was then log10-transformed. Results- In both trials, there was a significant correlation between the NIHSS at 24 hours and 5 to 7 days and the mRS. In MR CLEAN, we found a significant effect of endovascular treatment on the mRS and on the NIHSS at 24 hours and 5 to 7 days. After adjustment for NIHSS at 24 hours and 5 to 7 days, the effect of endovascular treatment on the mRS decreased from common odds ratio 1.68 (95% CI, 1.22-2.32) to respectively 1.36 (95% CI, 0.97-1.91) and 1.24 (95% CI, 0.87-1.79), indicating that treatment effect on the mRS is in large part mediated by the NIHSS. In the IMS III trial there was no treatment effect on the NIHSS at 24 hours and 5 to 7 days, corresponding with the absence of a treatment effect on the mRS. Conclusions- The NIHSS within 1 week satisfies the requirements for a surrogate end point and may be used as a primary outcome measure in trials of acute treatment for ischemic stroke, particularly in phase II(b) trials. This could reduce stroke-outcome assessment to its essentials (ie, neurological deficit), and reduce trial duration and costs. Whether and under which conditions it could be used in phase III trials requires a debate in the field with all parties. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.isrctn.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN10888758; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00359424.

Background: Although endovascular treatment (EVT) has greatly improved outcomes in acute ischemic stroke, still one third of patients die or remain severely disabled after stroke. If we could select patients with poor clinical outcome despite EVT, we could prevent futile treatment, avoid treatment complications, and further improve stroke care. We aimed to determine the accuracy of poor functional outcome prediction, defined as 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ≥5, despite EVT treatment.Methods: We included 1,526 patients from the MR CLEAN Registry, a prospective, observational, multicenter registry of ischemic stroke patients treated with EVT. We developed machine learning prediction models using all variables available at baseline before treatment. We optimized the models for both maximizing the area under the curve (AUC), reducing the number of false positives.Results: From 1,526 patients included, 480 (31%) of patients showed poor outcome. The highest AUC was 0.81 for random forest. The highest area under the precision recall curve was 0.69 for the support vector machine. The highest achieved specificity was 95% with a sensitivity of 34% for neural networks, indicating that all models contained false positives in their predictions. From 921 mRS 0–4 patients, 27–61 (3–6%) were incorrectly classified as poor outcome. From 480 poor outcome patients in the registry, 99–163 (21–34%) were correctly identified by the models.Conclusions: All prediction models showed a high AUC. The best-performing models correctly identified 34% of the poor outcome patients at a cost of misclassifying 4% of non-poor outcome patients. Further studies are necessary to determine whether these accuracies are reproducible before implementation in clinical practice.

In Response: We thank Dr van der Ende et al1 for their interest in our study and for drawing our attention to their recent study, “National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale—An Alternative Primary Outcome Measure for Trials of Acute Treatment for Ischemic Stroke,” wherein they analyzed data from MR-CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) and the IMS-III trial (Interventional Management of Stroke III).2 Herein, we would like to reiterate that our aim was to help guide the early clinical outcome measure selection for studies of intravenous alteplase.3 We agree with the authors that linear regression with covariate adjustment provides the highest statistical power for analysis of continuous variables. However, it is difficult to generate actionable thresholds with such analysis that can be easily communicated and applied in clinical practice. Our goal was to (1) determine if early neurological improvement defined as percentage change taking baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), rather than an absolute change, in NIHSS at 24 hours is more sensitive and specific for long-term functional outcome prediction, (2) evaluate the efficacy of alteplase versus placebo on early neurological improvement using percentage change in NIHSS as opposed to absolute change in NIHSS, and (3) compare various threshold of percentage change that might be commonly applied in clinical practice as well as early phase research studies. Thus, the receiver operating characteristics was chosen as the analytical test of preference. In addition, we show the benefit of alteplase over placebo with respect to early neurological improvement defined as percentage change in NIHSS as opposed to an absolute change. We report the results of binary logistic regression analyses testing the association of percent change in NIHSS with 90-day modified Rankin Scale score (0–1) in this response letter: odds ratio 0.968 (0.963–0.974), P<0.001; adjusted odds ratio, adjusted for age, 0.969 (0.963–0.974), P<0.001. We also agree that the ultimate test of a good surrogate outcome measure can only be performed by mediation analysis. The goal of our study is to merely guide the ideal definition of change in NIHSS at 24 hours that is most sensitive and specific for 90-day outcome prediction. Last, we agree that the 24-hour NIHSS score may be best predictive of 90-day outcome but unfortunately, it does not capture the response to alteplase treatment. For instance, in our patient population the admission NIHSS score was highly variable with a range of 1 to 37. Given the wide range in NIHSS score and the fact that the treatment magnitude of alteplase is not as large as that of mechanical thrombectomy, when understanding treatment response to alteplase it is crucial to not only look at the 24-hour NIHSS but compare it the admission NIHSS. And for this, we think that percentage change is superior to delta NIHSS score. However, large vessel occlusion patients represent a unique group of patients not well represented generally in all thrombolytic treated cohorts (such as the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke tissue-type plasminogen activator trial), with higher baseline NIHSS, greater magnitude of treatment effect reflected by change in NIHSS, and thus must be treated distinctly for definition of early neurological improvement but this also has varied in prior studies.4 Again, we thank Dr van der Ende et al for bringing up those important points, and we hope that we collaborate in future studies to help address these questions.

Background Despite evidence of a quite large beneficial effect of endovascular treatment (EVT) for ischemic stroke caused by anterior circulation large vessel occlusion, many patients do not recover even after complete recanalization. To some extent, this may be attributable to incomplete microvascular reperfusion, which can possibly be improved by antiplatelet agents and heparin. It is unknown whether periprocedural antithrombotic medication in patients treated with EVT improves functional outcome. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and unfractionated heparin (UFH), alone, or in combination, given to patients with an ischemic stroke caused by an intracranial large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation during EVT. Methods MR CLEAN-MED is a multicenter phase III trial with a prospective, 2 × 3 factorial randomized, open label, blinded end-point (PROBE) design, which aims to enroll 1500 patients. The trial is designed to evaluate the effect of intravenous ASA (300 mg), UFH (low or moderate dose), both or neither as adjunctive therapy to EVT. We enroll adult patients with a clinical diagnosis of stroke (NIHSS ≥ 2) and with a confirmed intracranial large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation on CTA or MRA, when EVT within 6 h from symptom onset is indicated and possible. The primary outcome is the score on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days. Treatment effect on the mRS will be estimated with ordinal logistic regression analysis, with adjustment for main prognostic variables. Secondary outcomes include stroke severity measured with the NIHSS at 24 h and at 5–7 days, follow-up infarct volume, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and mortality. Discussion Clinical equipoise exists whether antithrombotic medication should be administered during EVT for a large vessel occlusion, as ASA and/or UFH may improve functional outcome, but might also lead to an increased risk of sICH. When one or both of the study treatments show the anticipated effect on outcome, we will be able to improve outcome of patients treated with EVT by 5%. This amounts to more than 50 patients annually in the Netherlands, more than 1800 in Europe, and more than 1300 in the USA. Trial registration ISRCT, ISRCTN76741621 . Dec 6, 2017.

Background and Purpose-To assess the effect of inter-hospital transfer on time to treatment and functional outcome after endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke, we compared patients transferred from a primary stroke center to patients directly admitted to an intervention center in a large nationwide registry. Methods-MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) Registry is an ongoing, prospective, observational study in all centers that perform EVT in the Netherlands. We included adult patients with an acute anterior circulation stroke who received EVT between March 2014 to June 2016. Primary outcome was time from arrival at the first hospital to arterial groin puncture. Secondary outcomes included the 90-day modified Rankin Scale score and functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2). Results-In total 821/1526 patients, (54%) were transferred from a primary stroke center. Transferred patients less often had prestroke disability (227/800 [28%] versus 255/699 [36%]; P=0.02) and more often received intravenous thrombolytics (659/819 [81%] versus 511/704 [73%]; P<0.01). Time from first presentation to groin puncture was longer for transferred patients (164 versus 104 minutes; P<0.01, adjusted delay 57 minutes [95% CI, 51-62]). Transferred patients had worse functional outcome (adjusted common OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.62-0.90]) and less often achieved functional independence (244/720 [34%] versus 289/681 [42%], absolute risk difference -8.5% [95% CI, -8.7 to -8.3]). Conclusions-Interhospital transfer of patients with acute ischemic stroke is associated with delay of EVT and worse outcomes in routine clinical practice, even in a country where between-center distances are short. Direct transportation of patients potentially eligible for EVT to an intervention center may improve functional outcome.

Background and Purpose- Hemorrhagic transformation (HT) after acute ischemic stroke may cause severe neurological deterioration and affects functional outcome. Identifying patients most likely to suffer from this complication could potentially be used for future treatment selection. Reperfusion after endovascular therapy could be associated with different risk factors for HT than intravenous thrombolytics as these treatments largely differ. In this study, we aimed to identify clinical and imaging markers that are associated with HT subtypes in the MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) population. Methods- In this post hoc analysis, all patients with follow-up imaging were included. HT was classified according to ECASS II (European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study). Variables with an association of P<0.1 were included in the multivariable logistic regression to identify clinical and radiological variables associated with petechial hemorrhagic infarction, parenchymal hematoma (PH), and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Results- Of the 478 out of 500 included patients in this subanalysis, 46% had HT (n=222). Of these, 66% had hemorrhagic infarction (n=147) and 34% PH (n=75). Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was observed in 7.3% (n=35) of all patients. Baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (odds ratio [OR], 1.05,95% CI, 1.01-1.09 per point) and absent/poor collaterals (OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.05-3.42) were significantly associated with hemorrhagic infarction. Increased systolic blood pressure (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.05-1.31 per 10 mm Hg) and atrial fibrillation (OR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.08-3.48) were associated with PH. Increased systolic blood pressure (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.12-1.48) and antiplatelet use (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.08-6.3) were associated with symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Conclusions- Clinical and imaging stroke severity parameters were associated with HT, both in hemorrhagic infarction and PH, whereas baseline patients characteristics like systolic blood pressure, atrial fibrillation, and antiplatelet use were only associated with PH or symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN10888758.

Introduction: Carotid artery dissection (CAD) and atherosclerotic carotid artery occlusion (ACAO) are major causes of a tandem occlusion in patients with intracranial large vessel occlusion (LVO). Presence of tandem occlusions may hamper intracranial access and potentially increases the risk of procedural complications of endovascular treatment (EVT). Our aim was to assess neurological, functional and technical outcome and complications of EVT for intracranial LVO in patients with CAD in comparison to patients with ACAO and to patients without CAD or ACAO. Methods: We analyzed data of the MR CLEAN trial intervention arm and MR CLEAN Registry, acquired in 16 Dutch EVT-centers. Primary outcome was the change in stroke severity by comparing the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score at 24–48 h after treatment vs. baseline. Secondary outcomes included reperfusion rate and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). We compared outcomes and complications between patients with CAD vs. patients with ACAO and patients without CAD or ACAO. Results: In total, we identified 74 (4.7%) patients with CAD, 92 (5.9%) patients with ACAO and 1398 (89.4%) patients without CAD or ACAO. Neurological improvement at short-term after EVT in patients with CAD was significantly better compared to ACAO (resp. mean −5 vs. mean −1 NIHSS point; p = 0.03) and did not differ compared to patients without CAD or ACAO (−4 NIHSS points; p = 0.62). Rates of successful reperfusion in patients with CAD (47%) was comparable to patients with ACAO (47%; p = 1.00), but was less often achieved compared to patients without CAD or ACAO (58%; p = 0.08). Occurrence of sICH did not differ significantly between CAD patients (5%) and ACAO (11%; p = 0.33) or without CAD/ACAO (6%; p = 1.00). Conclusion: EVT in patients with intracranial LVO due to CAD results in neurological improvement comparable to patients without tandem occlusions. Therefore, carotid artery dissection by itself should not be a contraindication for endovascular treatment in stroke patients with intracranial large vessel occlusion. Although more challenging endovascular procedures are to be suspected in both patients with CAD or ACAO, accurate distinction between CAD and ACAO might influence clinical decision making as better clinical outcome can be expected in patients with CAD.

Background and Purpose— It is unclear whether endovascular treatment (EVT) is beneficial for patients with acute ischemic stroke with occlusion of the M2 segment of the middle cerebral artery. We aimed to compare functional outcomes, technical aspects, and complications of EVT between patients with acute ischemic stroke because of M2 and M1 occlusions in clinical practice. Furthermore, outcome and complications after EVT in dominant and nondominant caliber M2 division occlusions were studied. Methods— Data were obtained from the MR CLEAN Registry (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) which is an ongoing observational study in 16 Dutch centers performing EVT in the Netherlands. Functional outcome was measured with the modified Rankin Scale score at 90 days. Neurological recovery (delta National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale), successful reperfusion rates (extended Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction ≥2B), and safety outcomes were also investigated. Associations between occlusion location and outcome were analyzed with ordinal logistic regression models, with adjustment for other prognostic factors. Results— In total, 244 (24%) patients with an M2 and 759 (76%) patients with an M1 occlusion who underwent EVT were analyzed. Functional outcomes were not significantly different between patients with M2 versus M1 occlusions (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.87–1.73). Occurrence of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage was also similar for M2 and M1 occlusions (6.6% versus 5.9%; P=0.84). Further analysis about dominance of an M2 branch was performed in 175 (72%) patients. Neurological recovery was comparable (mean delta National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, −2±10 for dominant M2, −5±5 for nondominant M2, and −4±9 [P=0.24] for M1 occlusions). Furthermore, the effect of reperfusion status on functional outcome was comparable between occlusion divisions (common odds ratio, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.06–1.53 for dominant M2; common odds ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.93–1.87 for nondominant M2; and common odds ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.24–1.46 for M1 occlusions). Conclusions— Outcomes and complication rates after EVT were similar in patients with M2 and M1 occlusions. Although based on observational data and a limited sample size, a similar association of reperfusion status with functional outcome for all subgroups provides no evidence that patients with either a dominant or a nondominant M2 occlusion should be routinely excluded from EVT.

INTRODUCTION:The efficacy of both intravenous treatment (IVT) and endovascular treatment (EVT) for patients with acute ischaemic stroke strongly declines over time. Only a subset of patients with ischaemic stroke caused by an intracranial large vessel occlusion (LVO) in the anterior circulation can benefit from EVT. Several prehospital stroke scales were developed to identify patients that are likely to have an LVO, which could allow for direct transportation of EVT eligible patients to an endovascular-capable centre without delaying IVT for the other patients. We aim to prospectively validate these prehospital stroke scales simultaneously to assess their accuracy in predicting LVO in the prehospital setting.METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Prehospital triage of patients with suspected stroke symptoms (PRESTO) is a prospective multicentre observational cohort study in the southwest of the Netherlands including adult patients with suspected stroke in the ambulance. The paramedic will assess a combination of items from five prehospital stroke scales, without changing the normal workflow. Primary outcome is the clinical diagnosis of an acute ischaemic stroke with an intracranial LVO in the anterior circulation. Additional hospital data concerning the diagnosis and provided treatment will be collected by chart review. Logistic regression analysis will be performed, and performance of the prehospital stroke scales will be expressed as sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operator curve.ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The Institutional Review Board of the Erasmus MC University Medical Centre has reviewed the study protocol and confirmed that the Dutch Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) is not applicable. The findings of this study will be disseminated widely through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. The best performing scale, or the simplest scale in case of clinical equipoise, will be integrated in a decision model with other clinical characteristics and real-life driving times to improve prehospital triage of suspected stroke patients.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NTR7595.

Background and Purpose— Direct transportation to a center with facilities for endovascular treatment might be beneficial for patients with acute ischemic stroke, but it can also cause harm by delay of intravenous treatment. Our aim was to determine the optimal prehospital transportation strategy for individual patients and to assess which factors influence this decision. Methods— We constructed a decision tree model to compare outcome of ischemic stroke patients after transportation to a primary stroke center versus a more distant intervention center. The optimal strategy was estimated based on individual patient characteristics, geographic location, and workflow times. In the base case scenario, the primary stroke center was located at 20 minutes and the intervention center at 45 minutes. Additional sensitivity analyses included an urban scenario (10 versus 20 minutes) and a rural scenario (30 versus 90 minutes). Results— Direct transportation to the intervention center led to better outcomes in the base case scenario when the likelihood of a large vessel occlusion as a cause of the ischemic stroke was >33%. With a high likelihood of large vessel occlusion (66%, comparable with a Rapid Arterial Occlusion Evaluation score of 5 or above), the benefit of direct transportation to the intervention center was 0.10 quality-adjusted life years (=36 days in full health). In the urban scenario, direct transportation to an intervention center was beneficial when the risk of large vessel occlusion was 24% or higher. In the rural scenario, this threshold was 49%. Other factors influencing the decision included door-to-needle times, door-to-groin times, and the door-in-door-out time. Conclusions— The preferred prehospital transportation strategy for suspected stroke patients depends mainly on the likelihood of large vessel occlusion, driving times, and in-hospital workflow times. We constructed a robust model that combines these characteristics and can be used to personalize prehospital triage, especially in more remote areas.

Background and Purpose— Intravenous administration of heparin during endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke may improve outcomes. However, risks and benefits of this adjunctive therapy remain uncertain. We aimed to evaluate periprocedural intravenous heparin use in Dutch stroke intervention centers and to assess its efficacy and safety. Methods— Patients registered between March 2014 and June 2016 in the MR CLEAN Registry (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke), including all patients treated with endovascular treatment in the Netherlands, were analyzed. The primary outcome was functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale) at 90 days. Secondary outcomes were successful recanalization (extended Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction ≥2B), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and mortality at 90 days. We used multilevel regression analysis to evaluate the association of periprocedural intravenous heparin on outcomes, adjusted for center effects and prognostic factors. To account for possible unobserved confounding by indication, we analyzed the effect of center preference to administer intravenous heparin, defined as percentage of patients treated with intravenous heparin in a center, on functional outcome. Results— One thousand four hundred eighty-eight patients from 16 centers were analyzed, of whom 398 (27%) received intravenous heparin (median dose 5000 international units). There was substantial between-center variability in the proportion of patients treated with intravenous heparin (range, 0%–94%). There was no significant difference in functional outcome between patients treated with intravenous heparin and those without (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.87–1.56), successful recanalization (adjusted odds ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.89–1.71), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (adjusted odds ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.65–1.99), or mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.66–1.38). Analysis at center level showed that functional outcomes were better in centers with higher percentages of heparin administration (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.07 per 10% more heparin, 95% CI, 1.01–1.13). Conclusions— Substantial between-center variability exists in periprocedural intravenous heparin use during endovascular treatment, but the treatment is safe. Centers using heparin more often had better outcomes. A randomized trial is needed to further study these effects.