Early versus Later Anticoagulation for Stroke with Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: The effect of early as compared with later initiation of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in persons with atrial fibrillation who have had an acute ischemic stroke is unclear. METHODS: We performed an investigator-initiated, open-label trial at 103 sites in 15 countries. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to early anticoagulation (within 48 hours after a minor or moderate stroke or on day 6 or 7 after a major stroke) or later anticoagulation (day 3 or 4 after a minor stroke, day 6 or 7 after a moderate stroke, or day 12, 13, or 14 after a major stroke). Assessors were unaware of the trial-group assignments. The primary outcome was a composite of recurrent ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, major extracranial bleeding, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, or vascular death within 30 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes included the components of the composite primary outcome at 30 and 90 days. RESULTS: Of 2013 participants (37% with minor stroke, 40% with moderate stroke, and 23% with major stroke), 1006 were assigned to early anticoagulation and 1007 to later anticoagulation. A primary-outcome event occurred in 29 participants (2.9%) in the early-treatment group and 41 participants (4.1%) in the later-treatment group (risk difference, -1.18 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.84 to 0.47) by 30 days. Recurrent ischemic stroke occurred in 14 participants (1.4%) in the early-treatment group and 25 participants (2.5%) in the later-treatment group (odds ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.29 to 1.07) by 30 days and in 18 participants (1.9%) and 30 participants (3.1%), respectively, by 90 days (odds ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.33 to 1.06). Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 2 participants (0.2%) in both groups by 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, the incidence of recurrent ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, major extracranial bleeding, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, or vascular death at 30 days was estimated to range from 2.8 percentage points lower to 0.5 percentage points higher (based on the 95% confidence interval) with early than with later use of DOACs. (Funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation and others; ELAN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03148457.).

Endovascular Thrombectomy for Anterior Circulation Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke: An Evolution of Trials.

The last decade's progress in demonstrating the clinical benefit of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in patients with large vessel occlusion stroke has transformed the paradigm of care for these patients. This review presents the milestones in implementing EVT as standard of care, demonstrates the current state of evidence, provides guidance for identifying the candidate patient for EVT, and highlights unsolved and controversial issues. Ongoing trials investigate broadening of EVT indications for patients who present with large core infarction, adjunctive intra-arterial thrombolysis, medium vessel occlusion, low NIHSS, and tandem occlusion.

Effect of Bridging Thrombolysis on the Efficacy of Stent Retriever Thrombectomy Techniques : Insights from the SWIFT-DIRECT trial.

BACKGROUND: There are little available data regarding the influence of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) on the efficacy of different first line endovascular treatment (EVT) techniques. METHODS: We used the dataset of the SWIFT-DIRECT trial which randomized 408 patients to IVT + EVT or EVT alone at 48 international sites. The protocol required the use of a stent retriever (SR), but concomitant use of a balloon guide catheter (BGC) and/or distal aspiration (DA) catheter was left to the discretion of the operators. Four first line techniques were applied in the study population: SR, SR + BGC, SR + DA, SR + DA + BGC. To assess whether the effect of allocation to IVT + EVT versus EVT alone was modified by the first line technique, interaction models were fitted for predefined outcomes. The primary outcome was first pass mTICI 2c­3 reperfusion (FPR). RESULTS: This study included 385 patients of whom 172 were treated with SR + DA, 121 with SR + DA + BGC, 57 with SR + BGC and 35 with SR. There was no evidence that the effect of IVT + EVT versus EVT alone would be modified by the choice of first line technique; however, allocation to IVT + EVT increased the odds of FPR by a factor of 1.68 (95% confidence interval, CI 1.11-2.54). CONCLUSION: This post hoc analysis does not suggest treatment effect heterogeneity of IVT + EVT vs EVT alone in different stent retriever techniques but provides evidence for increased FPR if bridging IVT is administered before stent retriever thrombectomy.

Time to treatment with bridging intravenous alteplase before endovascular treatment:subanalysis of the randomized controlled SWIFT-DIRECT trial.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that treatment delays might be an effect modifier regarding risks and benefits of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) before mechanical thrombectomy (MT). METHODS: We used the dataset of the SWIFT-DIRECT trial, which randomized 408 patients to IVT+MT or MT alone. Potential interactions between assignment to IVT+MT and expected time from onset-to-needle (OTN) as well as expected time from door-to-needle (DTN) were included in regression models. The primary outcome was functional independence (modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-2) at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included mRS shift, mortality, recanalization rates, and (symptomatic) intracranial hemorrhage at 24 hours. RESULTS: We included 408 patients (IVT+MT 207, MT 201, median age 72 years (IQR 64-81), 209 (51.2%) female). The expected median OTN and DTN were 142 min and 54 min in the IVT+MT group and 129 min and 51 min in the MT alone group. Overall, there was no significant interaction between OTN and bridging IVT assignment regarding either the functional (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.76, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.30) and safety outcomes or the recanalization rates. Analysis of in-hospital delays showed no significant interaction between DTN and bridging IVT assignment regarding the dichotomized functional outcome (aOR 0.48, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.62), but the shift and mortality analyses suggested a greater benefit of IVT when in-hospital delays were short. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that the effect of bridging IVT on functional independence is modified by overall or in-hospital treatment delays. Considering its low power, this subgroup analysis could have missed a clinically important effect, and exploratory analysis of secondary clinical outcomes indicated a potentially favorable effect of IVT with shorter in-hospital delays. Heterogeneity of the IVT effect size before MT should be further analyzed in individual patient meta-analysis of comparable trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03192332.