Blood pressure-lowering treatment for the prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with atrial fibrillation: An individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Randomised evidence on the efficacy of blood pressure (BP)-lowering treatment to reduce cardiovascular risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effects of BP-lowering drugs in patients with and without AF at baseline. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The study was based on the resource provided by the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration (BPLTTC), in which individual participant data (IPD) were extracted from trials with over 1,000 patient-years of follow-up in each arm, and that had randomly assigned patients to different classes of BP-lowering drugs, BP-lowering drugs versus placebo, or more versus less intensive BP-lowering regimens. For this study, only trials that had collected information on AF status at baseline were included. The effects of BP-lowering treatment on a composite endpoint of major cardiovascular events (stroke, ischaemic heart disease or heart failure) according to AF status at baseline were estimated using fixed-effect one-stage IPD meta-analyses based on Cox proportional hazards models stratified by trial. Furthermore, to assess whether the associations between the intensity of BP reduction and cardiovascular outcomes are similar in those with and without AF at baseline, we used a meta-regression. From the full BPLTTC database, 28 trials (145,653 participants) were excluded because AF status at baseline was uncertain or unavailable. A total of 22 trials were included with 188,570 patients, of whom 13,266 (7%) had AF at baseline. Risk of bias assessment showed that 20 trials were at low risk of bias and 2 trials at moderate risk. Meta-regression showed that relative risk reductions were proportional to trial-level intensity of BP lowering in patients with and without AF at baseline. Over 4.5 years of median follow-up, a 5-mm Hg systolic BP (SBP) reduction lowered the risk of major cardiovascular events both in patients with AF (hazard ratio [HR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83 to 1.00) and in patients without AF at baseline (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.93), with no difference between subgroups. There was no evidence for heterogeneity of treatment effects by baseline SBP or drug class in patients with AF at baseline. The findings of this study need to be interpreted in light of its potential limitations, such as the limited number of trials, limitation in ascertaining AF cases due to the nature of the arrhythmia and measuring BP in patients with AF. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, we found that BP-lowering treatment reduces the risk of major cardiovascular events similarly in individuals with and without AF. Pharmacological BP lowering for prevention of cardiovascular events should be recommended in patients with AF.

Endovascular thrombectomy and intra-arterial interventions for acute ischaemic stroke.

BACKGROUND: Most disabling strokes are due to a blockage of a large artery in the brain by a blood clot. Prompt removal of the clot with intra-arterial thrombolytic drugs or mechanical devices, or both, can restore blood flow before major brain damage has occurred, leading to improved recovery. However, these so-called endovascular interventions can cause bleeding in the brain. This is a review of randomised controlled trials of endovascular thrombectomy or intra-arterial thrombolysis, or both, for acute ischaemic stroke. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether endovascular thrombectomy or intra-arterial interventions, or both, plus medical treatment are superior to medical treatment alone in people with acute ischaemic stroke. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Trials Registers of the Cochrane Stroke Group and Cochrane Vascular Group (last searched 1 September 2020), CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library, 1 September 2020), MEDLINE (May 2010 to 1 September 2020), and Embase (May 2010 to 1 September 2020). We also searched trials registers, screened reference lists, and contacted researchers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any endovascular intervention plus medical treatment compared with medical treatment alone in people with definite ischaemic stroke. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (MBR and MJ) applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed trial quality. Two review authors (MBR and HL) assessed risk of bias, and the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We obtained both published and unpublished data if available. Our primary outcome was favourable functional outcome at the end of the scheduled follow-up period, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2. Eighteen trials (i.e. all but one included trial) reported their outcome at 90 days. Secondary outcomes were death from all causes at in the acute phase and by the end of follow-up, symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage in the acute phase and by the end of follow-up, neurological status at the end of follow-up, and degree of recanalisation. MAIN RESULTS: We included 19 studies with a total of 3793 participants. The majority of participants had large artery occlusion in the anterior circulation, and were treated within six hours of symptom onset with endovascular thrombectomy. Treatment increased the chance of achieving a good functional outcome, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2: risk ratio (RR) 1.50 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37 to 1.63; 3715 participants, 18 RCTs; high-certainty evidence). Treatment also reduced the risk of death at end of follow-up: RR 0.85 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.97; 3793 participants, 19 RCTs; high-certainty evidence) without increasing the risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage in the acute phase: RR 1.46 (95% CI 0.91 to 2.36; 1559 participants, 6 RCTs; high-certainty evidence) or by end of follow-up: RR 1.05 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.52; 1752 participants, 10 RCTs; high-certainty evidence); however, the wide confidence intervals preclude any firm conclusion. Neurological recovery to National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score 0 to 1 and degree of recanalisation rates were better in the treatment group: RR 2.03 (95% CI 1.21 to 3.40; 334 participants, 3 RCTs; high-certainty evidence) and RR 3.11 (95% CI 2.18 to 4.42; 268 participants, 3 RCTs; high-certainty evidence), respectively. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with acute ischaemic stroke due to large artery occlusion in the anterior circulation, endovascular thrombectomy can increase the chance of survival with a good functional outcome without increasing the risk of intracerebral haemorrhage or death.

Change in Body Weight and Long-Term Risk of Stroke and Death in Healthy Men.

Background and Purpose- The importance of weight change for the risk of stroke is not well known. We examined the associations between early- and mid-life weight change and risks of stroke and death during long-term follow-up of healthy men. Methods- We recruited healthy men aged between 40 and 59 years and performed a cardiovascular examination at baseline and again at 7 years. We collected data on weight change since the age of 25 (early-life weight change) and measured weight change from baseline to the visit at 7 years (mid-life weight change). For both weight change periods, participants were divided into the following categories: weight loss, weight gain 0 to 4.9 kg, weight gain 5 to 9.9 kg, and weight gain ≥10 kg. Data on stroke and death were collected up to 35 years, from study visits, hospital records, and the National Cause of Death Registry. We used Cox regression to analyze the associations between weight change during early-life and mid-life and risks of stroke and death. Results- Of the 2014 participants, 2014 (100%) had data on early-life weight change and were followed for a median of 30.1 years, while 1403 had data on mid-life weight change and were followed for a median of 24.6 years. During early-life, compared with those who had weight gain 0 to 4.9 kg, hazard ratio for stroke was 1.46 (95% CI, 1.09-1.95) among those with weight gain 5 to 9.9 kg, 1.39 (95% CI, 1.03-1.87) for those with weight gain ≥10 kg, and 1.46 (95% CI, 0.99-2.11) among those with weight loss. For all-cause death, the hazard ratios were 1.08 (95% CI, 0.92-1.23), 1.14 (95% CI, 0.98-1.33), and 1.29 (95% CI, 1.06-1.56), respectively. During mid-life, there were no significant differences in risk of stroke or death between the groups. Conclusions- Weight increase during early-life, but not mid-life, seems to be associated with increased long-term risk of stroke in healthy men. If these findings can be confirmed, efforts to prevent weight increase should target the younger population.

Utility-Weighted Modified Rankin Scale Scores for the Assessment of Stroke Outcome: Pooled Analysis of 20 000+ Patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patient-centered care prioritizes patient beliefs and values towards wellbeing. We aimed to map functional status (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] scores) and health-related quality of life on the European Quality of Life 5-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D) to derive utility-weighted (UW) stroke outcome measures and test their statistical properties and construct validity. METHODS: UW-mRS scores were derived using linear regression, with mRS as a discrete ordinal explanatory response variable in 8 large international acute stroke trials. Linear regression models were used to validate UW-mRS scores by assessing differences in mean UW-mRS scores between the treatment groups of each trial. To explore the variability in EQ-5D between individual mRS categories, we generated receiver operator characteristic curves for EQ-5D to differentiate between sequential mRS categories and misclassification matrix to classify individual patients into a matched mRS category based on the closest UW-mRS value to their observed individual EQ-5D value. RESULTS: Among 22 946 acute stroke patients, derived UW-mRS across mRS scores 0 to 6 were 0.96, 0.83, 0.72, 0.54, 0.22, -0.18, and 0, respectively. Both UW-mRS and ordinal mRS scores captured divergent treatment effects across all 8 acute stroke trials. The sample sizes required to detect the treatment effects using UW-mRS scores as a continuous variable were almost half that required in trials for a binary cut point on the mRS. Area under receiver operator characteristic curves based on EQ-5D utility values varied from 0.66 to 0.81. Misclassification matrix showed moderate agreement between actual and matched mRS scores (kappa, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.67-0.68]). CONCLUSIONS: Medical strategies that target avoiding dependency may provide maximum benefit in terms of poststroke health-related quality of life. Despite variable differences with mRS scores, the UW-mRS provides efficiency gains as a smaller sample size is required to detect a treatment effect in acute stroke trials through use of continuous scores. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT00226096, NCT00716079, NCT01422616, NCT02162017, NCT00120003, NCT02123875. URL: http://ctri.nic.in; Unique identifier: CTRI/2013/04/003557. URL: https://www.isrctn.com; Unique identifier: ISRCTN89712435.

The association between patterns of atrial fibrillation, anticoagulation, and cardiovascular events.

AIMS: Guidelines do not recommend to take pattern of atrial fibrillation (AF) into account for the indication of anticoagulation (AC). We assessed AF pattern and the risk of cardiovascular events during 2-years of follow-up. METHODS AND RESULTS: We categorized AF as paroxysmal, persistent, or permanent in 29 181 patients enrolled (2010-15) in the Global Anticoagulant Registry In the FIELD of AF (GARFIELD-AF). We used multivariable Cox regression to assess the risks of stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and death across patterns of AF, and whether this changed with AC on outcomes. Atrial fibrillation pattern was paroxysmal in 14 344 (49.2%), persistent in 8064 (27.6%), and permanent 6773 (23.2%) patients. Median CHA2DS2-VASc, GARFIELD-AF, and HAS-BLED scores assessing the risk of stroke/SE and/or bleeding were similar across AF patterns, but the risk of death, as assessed by the GARFIELD-AF risk calculator, was higher in non-paroxysmal than in paroxysmal AF patterns. During 2-year follow-up, after adjustment, non-paroxysmal AF patterns were associated with significantly higher rates of all-cause death, stroke/SE, and new/worsening congestive heart failure (CHF) than paroxysmal AF in non-anticoagulated patients only. In anticoagulated patients, a significantly higher risk of death but not of stroke/SE and new/worsening CHF persisted in non-paroxysmal compared with paroxysmal AF patterns. CONCLUSION: In non-anticoagulated patients, non-paroxysmal AF patterns were associated with higher risks of stroke/SE, new/worsening HF and death than paroxysmal AF. In anticoagulated patients, the risk of stroke/SE and new/worsening HF was similar across all AF patterns. Thus AF pattern is no longer prognostic for stroke/SE when patients are treated with anticoagulants. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362.

Cost-benefit of outcome adjudication in nine randomised stroke trials.

BACKGROUND: Central adjudication of outcomes is common for randomised trials and should control for differential misclassification. However, few studies have estimated the cost of the adjudication process. METHODS: We estimated the cost of adjudicating the primary outcome in nine randomised stroke trials (25,436 participants). The costs included adjudicators' time, direct payments to adjudicators, and co-ordinating centre costs (e.g. uploading cranial scans and general set-up costs). The number of events corrected after adjudication was our measure of benefit. We calculated cost per corrected event for each trial and in total. RESULTS: The primary outcome in all nine trials was either stroke or a composite that included stroke. In total, the adjudication process associated with this primary outcome cost in excess of £100,000 for a third of the trials (3/9). Mean cost per event corrected by adjudication was £2295.10 (SD: £1482.42). CONCLUSIONS: Central adjudication is a time-consuming and potentially costly process. These costs need to be considered when designing a trial and should be evaluated alongside the potential benefits adjudication brings to determine whether they outweigh this expense.

Change in Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Risk of Stroke and Death: Long-Term Follow-Up of Healthy Middle-Aged Men.

Background and Purpose- Low cardiorespiratory fitness is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease. The present study aims to assess whether change of fitness over time has any impact on long-term risk of stroke and death. Methods- We recruited healthy men aged 40 to 59 years in 1972 to 1975, and followed them until 2007. Physical fitness was assessed with a bicycle ECG test at baseline and again at 7 years, by dividing the total exercise work by body weight. Participants were categorized as remained fit, became unfit, remained unfit, or became fit, depending on whether fitness remained or crossed the median values from baseline to the 7-year visit. Outcome data were collected up to 35 years, from study visits, hospital records, and the National Cause of Death Registry. Risks of stroke and death were estimated by Cox regression analyses and expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs. Results- Of 2014 participants, 1403 were assessed both at baseline and again at 7 years, and were followed for a mean of 23.6 years. Compared with the became unfit group, risk of stroke was 0.85 (0.54-1.36) for the remained unfit, 0.43 (0.28-0.67) for the remained fit, and 0.34 (0.17-0.67) for the became fit group. For all-cause death, risks were 0.99 (0.76-1.29), 0.57 (0.45-0.74), and 0.65 (0.46-0.90), respectively. Among those with high fitness at baseline, the became unfit group had a significantly higher risk of stroke (HR, 2.35; CI, 1.49-3.63) and death (HR, 1.74; CI, 1.35-2.23) than those who remained fit. Among those who had low fitness at baseline, the became fit group had a significantly lower risk of stroke (HR, 0.40; CI, 0.21-0.72) and death (HR, 0.66; CI, 0.50-0.85) than participants in the remained unfit group. Conclusions- Cardiorespiratory fitness at baseline and change in fitness was associated with large changes in long-term risk of stroke and death. These findings support the encouragement of regular exercise as a stroke prevention strategy.

Outcome Assessment by Central Adjudicators Versus Site Investigators in Stroke Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background and Purpose- In randomized stroke trials, central adjudication of a trial's primary outcome is regularly implemented. However, recent evidence questions the importance of central adjudication in randomized trials. The aim of this review was to compare outcomes assessed by central adjudicators with outcomes assessed by site investigators. Methods- We included randomized stroke trials where the primary outcome had undergone an assessment by site investigators and central adjudicators. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar for eligible studies. We extracted information about the adjudication process as well as the treatment effect for the primary outcome, assessed both by central adjudicators and by site investigators. We calculated the ratio of these treatment effects so that a ratio of these treatment effects >1 indicated that central adjudication resulted in a more beneficial treatment effect than assessment by the site investigator. A random-effects meta-analysis model was fitted to estimate a pooled effect. Results- Fifteen trials, comprising 69 560 participants, were included. The primary outcomes included were stroke (8/15, 53%), a composite event including stroke (6/15, 40%) and functional outcome after stroke measured on the modified Rankin Scale (1/15, 7%). The majority of site investigators were blind to treatment allocation (9/15, 60%). On average, there was no difference in treatment effect estimates based on data from central adjudicators and site investigators (pooled ratio of these treatment effects=1.02; 95% CI, [0.95-1.09]). Conclusions- We found no evidence that central adjudication of the primary outcome in stroke trials had any impact on trial conclusions. This suggests that potential advantages of central adjudication may not outweigh cost and time disadvantages in stroke studies if the primary purpose of adjudication is to ensure validity of trial findings.

Effect of Glyceryl Trinitrate on Hemodynamics in Acute Stroke.

Background and Purpose- Increased blood pressure (BP), heart rate, and their derivatives (variability, pulse pressure, rate-pressure product) are associated with poor clinical outcome in acute stroke. We assessed the effects of glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) on hemodynamic parameters and these on outcome in participants in the ENOS trial (Efficacy of Nitric Oxide in Stroke). Methods- Four thousand and eleven patients with acute stroke and raised BP were randomized within 48 hours of onset to transdermal GTN or no GTN for 7 days. Peripheral hemodynamics were measured at baseline (3 measures) and daily (2 measures) during treatment. Between-visit BP variability over days 1 to 7 (as SD) was assessed in quintiles. Functional outcome was assessed as modified Rankin Scale and cognition as telephone mini-mental state examination at day 90. Analyses were adjusted for baseline prognostic variables. Data are mean difference or odds ratios with 95% CI. Results- Increased baseline BP (diastolic, variability), heart rate, and rate-pressure product were each associated with unfavorable functional outcome at day 90. Increased between-visit systolic BP variability was associated with an unfavourable shift in modified Rankin Scale (highest quintile adjusted odds ratio, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.37-1.99), worse cognitive scores (telephone mini-mental state examination: highest quintile adjusted mean difference, -2.03; 95% CI, -2.84 to -1.22), and increased odds of death at day 90 (highest quintile adjusted odds ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.12-2.19). GTN lowered BP and rate-pressure product and increased heart rate at day 1 and reduced between-visit systolic BP variability. Conclusions- Increased between-visit BP variability was associated with poor functional and cognitive outcomes and increased death 90 days after acute stroke. In addition to lowering BP and rate-pressure product, GTN reduced between-visit systolic BP variability. Agents that lower BP variability in acute stroke require further study.

Prehospital Transdermal Glyceryl Trinitrate for Ultra-Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Data From the RIGHT-2 Trial.

Background and Purpose- Pilot trials suggest that glyceryl trinitrate (GTN; nitroglycerin) may improve outcome when administered early after stroke onset. Methods- We undertook a multicentre, paramedic-delivered, ambulance-based, prospective randomized, sham-controlled, blinded-end point trial in adults with presumed stroke within 4 hours of ictus. Participants received transdermal GTN (5 mg) or a sham dressing (1:1) in the ambulance and then daily for three days in hospital. The primary outcome was the 7-level modified Rankin Scale at 90 days assessed by central telephone treatment-blinded follow-up. This prespecified subgroup analysis focuses on participants with an intracerebral hemorrhage as their index event. Analyses are intention-to-treat. Results- Of 1149 participants with presumed stroke, 145 (13%; GTN, 74; sham, 71) had an intracerebral hemorrhage: time from onset to randomization median, 74 minutes (interquartile range, 45-110). By admission to hospital, blood pressure tended to be lower with GTN as compared with sham: mean, 4.4/3.5 mm Hg. The modified Rankin Scale score at 90 days was nonsignificantly higher in the GTN group: adjusted common odds ratio for poor outcome, 1.87 (95% CI, 0.98-3.57). A prespecified global analysis of 5 clinical outcomes (dependency, disability, cognition, quality of life, and mood) was worse with GTN; Mann-Whitney difference, 0.18 (95% CI, 0.01-0.35; Wei-Lachin test). GTN was associated with larger hematoma and growth, and more mass effect and midline shift on neuroimaging, and altered use of hospital resources. Death in hospital but not at day 90 was increased with GTN. There were no significant between-group differences in serious adverse events. Conclusions- Prehospital treatment with GTN worsened outcomes in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage. Since these results could relate to the play of chance, confounding, or a true effect of GTN, further randomized evidence on the use of vasodilators in ultra-acute intracerebral hemorrhage is needed. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN26986053.

Rivaroxaban plasma levels in acute ischemic stroke and intracerebral hemorrhage.

OBJECTIVE: Information about rivaroxaban plasma level (RivLev) may guide treatment decisions in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) taking rivaroxaban. METHODS: In a multicenter registry-based study (Novel Oral Anticoagulants in Stroke Patients collaboration; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02353585) of patients with stroke while taking rivaroxaban, we compared RivLev in patients with AIS and ICH. We determined how many AIS patients had RivLev ≤ 100ng/ml, indicating possible eligibility for thrombolysis, and how many ICH patients had RivLev ≥ 75ng/ml, making them possibly eligible for the use of specific reversal agents. We explored factors associated with RivLev (Spearman correlation, regression models) and studied the sensitivity and specificity of international normalized ratio (INR) thresholds to substitute RivLev using cross tables and receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Among 241 patients (median age = 80 years, interquartile range [IQR] = 73-84; median time from onset to admission = 2 hours, IQR = 1-4.5 hours; median RivLev = 89ng/ml, IQR = 31-194), 190 had AIS and 51 had ICH. RivLev was similar in AIS patients (82ng/ml, IQR = 30-202) and ICH patients (102ng/ml, IQR = 51-165; p = 0.24). Trough RivLev(≤137ng/ml) occurred in 126/190 (66.3%) AIS and 34/51 (66.7%) ICH patients. Among AIS patients, 108/190 (56.8%) had RivLev ≤ 100ng/ml. In ICH patients, 33/51 (64.7%) had RivLev ≥ 75ng/ml. RivLev was associated with rivaroxaban dosage, and inversely with renal function and time since last intake (each p < 0.05). INR ≤ 1.0 had a specificity of 98.9% and a sensitivity of 25.7% to predict RivLev ≤ 100ng/ml. INR ≥ 1.4 had a sensitivity of 59.3% and specificity of 90.1% to predict RivLev ≥ 75ng/ml. INTERPRETATION: RivLev did not differ between patients with AIS and ICH. Half of the patients with AIS under rivaroxaban had a RivLev low enough to consider thrombolysis. In ICH patients, two-thirds had a RivLev high enough to meet the eligibility for the use of a specific reversal agent. INR thresholds perform poorly to inform treatment decisions in individual patients. Ann Neurol 2018;83:451-459.

Blood pressure variability in hypertensive patients with atrial fibrillation in the VALUE trial.

PURPOSE: Blood pressure variability is associated with traditional cardiovascular risk factors, but little is known about the association with atrial fibrillation. We compared blood pressure variability in patients with and without atrial fibrillation using data from the Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation (VALUE) trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The VALUE trial was a randomised-controlled trial of valsartan versus amlodipine in patients with hypertension and high cardiovascular risk, followed for 4.2 years (mean). For the present analysis we included patients with electrocardiogram at baseline and during follow-up, and ≥3 visits from 6 months onwards. We compared standard deviation (SD) of all blood pressures within each visit averaged across all visits (within-visit variability) and of mean blood pressure at each visit (visit-to-visit variability) in patients with and without atrial fibrillation at baseline. We similarly compared patients who developed non-persistent or persistent atrial fibrillation during follow-up with those who did not, using t-tests, ANOVA and linear regression. RESULTS: Of 15,245 patients in the VALUE trial, 13,827 were eligible for analysis. SD of visit-to-visit systolic blood pressure was not significantly different between patients with and without atrial fibrillation at baseline (mean difference 0.3 mm Hg, p = 0.4), but significantly higher in patients with incident non-persistent or persistent atrial fibrillation during follow-up than in those who never developed atrial fibrillation (differences 1.2 and 1.8 mm Hg, respectively, p-values <0.0001). Associations with non-persistent and persistent atrial fibrillation were confirmed in linear regression models (p-values <0.0001). SD of within-visit systolic blood pressure was not significantly different between patients with and without atrial fibrillation at baseline (p = 0.4) but significantly higher in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation during follow-up (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: In patients treated for hypertension, atrial fibrillation was not associated with increased blood pressure variability, but blood pressure variability was higher in those who developed atrial fibrillation during follow-up.

Blood pressure variability and risk of cardiovascular events and death in patients with hypertension and different baseline risks.

Aims: Blood pressure variability is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events, particularly in high-risk patients. We assessed if variability was associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events and death in hypertensive patients at different risk levels. Methods and results: The Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation trial was a randomized controlled trial of valsartan vs. amlodipine in patients with hypertension and different risks of cardiovascular events, followed for a mean of 4.2 years. We calculated standard deviation (SD) of mean systolic blood pressure from visits from 6 months onward in patients with ≥3 visits and no events during the first 6 months. We compared the risk of cardiovascular events in the highest and lowest quintile of visit-to-visit blood pressure variability, using Cox regression. For analysis of death, variability was analysed as a continuous variable. Of 13 803 patients included, 1557 (11.3%) had a cardiovascular event and 1089 (7.9%) died. Patients in the highest quintile of SD had an increased risk of cardiovascular events [hazard ratio (HR) 2.1, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.7-2.4; P < 0.0001], and a 5 mmHg increase in SD of systolic blood pressure was associated with a 10% increase in the risk of death (HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.04-1.17; P = 0.002). Associations were stronger among younger patients and patients with lower systolic blood pressure, and similar between patients with different baseline risks, except for higher risk of death among patients with established cardiovascular disease. Conclusion: Higher visit-to-visit systolic blood pressure variability is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events in patients with hypertension, irrespective of baseline risk of cardiovascular events. Associations were stronger in younger patients and in those with lower mean systolic blood pressure.

Effects of Candesartan in the Acute Phase of Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Uncertainty persists over the effects of blood pressure-lowering treatment in acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). We assessed the effects of treatment with candesartan in acute ICH and according to different types of hematoma. METHODS: Post-hoc analysis of the Scandinavian Candesartan Acute Stroke Trial, a randomized- and placebo-controlled, double-masked trial of candesartan in patients with any stroke within the acute phase (<30 hours) and high systolic blood pressure (≥140 mm Hg). We collected baseline computed tomography scans of participants with ICH, and characterized hematoma volume (planimetric approach), location (deep versus lobar or infratentorial), hemisphere side, and presence of intraventricular hemorrhage. The trial's 2 coprimary effect variables were the composite endpoint of vascular death, stroke or myocardial infarction, and functional outcome at 6 months according to the modified Rankin scale. We used Cox, ordinal, and binary logistic regression for analysis and adjusted for key, predefined prognostic variables. RESULTS: Of 274 participants with ICH, computed tomography scans were available in 205 patients (74.8%). There were no significant differences between the candesartan and placebo groups with respect to hematoma volume (median 15.6 mL versus 13.5 mL, P = .96), deep location (77% versus 72%, P = .64), right hemisphere (49% versus 51%, P = .46), and presence of intraventricular hemorrhage (18% versus 11%, P = .22). Candesartan was associated with a significant increase in poor functional outcome in patients with deep hematoma (adjusted common odds ratio 2.27, 95% confidence interval 1.23-4.18, P = .009, P for interaction .015), but there was no differential effect on functional outcome or vascular events in any of the other imaging subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Candesartan was not associated with any beneficial effect when initiated in the acute phase of ICH, a possible adverse effect on functional outcome in patients with deep hematomas cannot be ruled out by this study alone.

Blood pressure-lowering treatment strategies based on cardiovascular risk versus blood pressure: A meta-analysis of individual participant data.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines have traditionally recommended blood pressure treatment based primarily on blood pressure thresholds. In contrast, using predicted cardiovascular risk has been advocated as a more effective strategy to guide treatment decisions for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. We aimed to compare outcomes from a blood pressure-lowering treatment strategy based on predicted cardiovascular risk with one based on systolic blood pressure (SBP) level. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used individual participant data from the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration (BPLTTC) from 1995 to 2013. Trials randomly assigned participants to either blood pressure-lowering drugs versus placebo or more intensive versus less intensive blood pressure-lowering regimens. We estimated 5-y risk of CVD events using a multivariable Weibull model previously developed in this dataset. We compared the two strategies at specific SBP thresholds and across the spectrum of risk and blood pressure levels studied in BPLTTC trials. The primary outcome was number of CVD events avoided per persons treated. We included data from 11 trials (47,872 participants). During a median of 4.0 y of follow-up, 3,566 participants (7.5%) experienced a major cardiovascular event. Areas under the curve comparing the two treatment strategies throughout the range of possible thresholds for CVD risk and SBP demonstrated that, on average, a greater number of CVD events would be avoided for a given number of persons treated with the CVD risk strategy compared with the SBP strategy (area under the curve 0.71 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.72] for the CVD risk strategy versus 0.54 [95% CI 0.53-0.55] for the SBP strategy). Compared with treating everyone with SBP ≥ 150 mmHg, a CVD risk strategy would require treatment of 29% (95% CI 26%-31%) fewer persons to prevent the same number of events or would prevent 16% (95% CI 14%-18%) more events for the same number of persons treated. Compared with treating everyone with SBP ≥ 140 mmHg, a CVD risk strategy would require treatment of 3.8% (95% CI 12.5% fewer to 7.2% more) fewer persons to prevent the same number of events or would prevent 3.1% (95% CI 1.5%-5.0%) more events for the same number of persons treated, although the former estimate was not statistically significant. In subgroup analyses, the CVD risk strategy did not appear to be more beneficial than the SBP strategy in patients with diabetes mellitus or established CVD. CONCLUSIONS: A blood pressure-lowering treatment strategy based on predicted cardiovascular risk is more effective than one based on blood pressure levels alone across a range of thresholds. These results support using cardiovascular risk assessment to guide blood pressure treatment decision-making in moderate- to high-risk individuals, particularly for primary prevention.

Effect of strenuous exercise on mediators of inflammation in patients with coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is considered a low-grade inflammatory disease. We aimed to identify effects of short-term strenuous exercise on mediators of systemic inflammation, endothelial and platelet activation in patients with angiographically verified CAD. We hypothesized that a more pronounced inflammatory response would be present in patients with CAD than in those without CAD. METHODS: In subjects with symptoms indicative of stable CAD, an exercise stress test on a bicycle ergometer was performed. Venous blood samples, taken at rest and within 5 min after end of exercise, were analyzed for the following markers by ELISAs: TNF-α, IL-6, MCP-1, ICAM-1, VCAM-1, E-selectin, P-selectin, CD40L and RANTES. All participants underwent conventional coronary angiography. CAD was defined as having any degree of atherosclerosis. RESULTS: A total of 110 patients were included, of whom 74 were found to have CAD. Mean exercise duration was 10:06 ±â€¯3:56 min with no significant difference between the two groups. All measured markers changed significantly during exercise (p ≤ 0.012). A significantly less pronounced increase in CD40L in the CAD group than in the no CAD group was observed (p = 0.050), however, after adjustment for hematocrit this difference was no longer significant. CONCLUSION: An instant inflammatory response was observed during short-term strenuous exercise in patients with symptoms of CAD. However, the exercise mediated response was not more pronounced in patients with CAD.

Impact of hydration status on haemodynamics, effects of acute blood pressure-lowering treatment, and prognosis after stroke.

AIMS: Although high blood pressure (BP) is common in acute stroke and associated with poor outcome, the Efficacy of Nitric Oxide in Stroke (ENOS) trial showed no beneficial effect of antihypertensive treatment in this situation. Antihypertensive agents have accentuated effects in dehydrated patients. We assessed the impact of dehydration on haemodynamics, the effects of antihypertensive treatment, and prognosis in the ENOS trial. METHODS: ENOS randomized 4011 patients with acute stroke and raised systolic BP to a glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) patch or no GTN patch, and to continue or to stop existing antihypertensive treatment within 48 h of onset. The primary outcome was functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale, mRS) at day 90. Blood markers of dehydration at baseline were collected at two sites (n = 310) and their relationship with haemodynamics and outcome was assessed. RESULTS: There were no significant associations between dehydration markers and fall in blood pressure from baseline to day 1, and no significant interaction with allocated treatment. Overall, increasing urea was associated with an unfavourable shift in mRS [odds ratio 3.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42, 8.32; P = 0.006] and increased risk of death at day 90 (hazard ratio 4.55, 95% CI 1.51, 13.66; P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Blood pressure-lowering treatment was safe in dehydrated patients, with no precipitous changes in BP, thus supporting its use in acute stroke prior to blood markers of dehydration becoming available. Increased baseline urea was associated with poor prognosis after stroke.

Factor Xa inhibitors versus vitamin K antagonists for preventing cerebral or systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Factor Xa inhibitors and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are now recommended in treatment guidelines for preventing stroke and systemic embolic events in people with atrial fibrillation (AF). This is an update of a Cochrane review previously published in 2013. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of treatment with factor Xa inhibitors versus VKAs for preventing cerebral or systemic embolic events in people with AF. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the trials registers of the Cochrane Stroke Group and the Cochrane Heart Group (September 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (August 2017), MEDLINE (1950 to April 2017), and Embase (1980 to April 2017). We also contacted pharmaceutical companies, authors and sponsors of relevant published trials. We used outcome data from marketing authorisation applications of apixaban, edoxaban and rivaroxaban that were submitted to regulatory authorities in Europe and the USA. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that directly compared the effects of long-term treatment (lasting more than four weeks) with factor Xa inhibitors versus VKAs for preventing cerebral and systemic embolism in people with AF. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The primary efficacy outcome was the composite endpoint of all strokes and systemic embolic events. Two review authors independently extracted data, and assessed the quality of the trials and the risk of bias. We calculated a weighted estimate of the typical treatment effect across trials using the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) by means of a fixed-effect model. In case of moderate or high heterogeneity of treatment effects, we used a random-effects model to compare the overall treatment effects. We also performed a pre-specified sensitivity analysis excluding any open-label studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included data from 67,688 participants randomised into 13 RCTs. The included trials directly compared dose-adjusted warfarin with either apixaban, betrixaban, darexaban, edoxaban, idraparinux, idrabiotaparinux, or rivaroxaban. The majority of the included data (approximately 90%) was from apixaban, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban.The composite primary efficacy endpoint of all strokes (both ischaemic and haemorrhagic) and non-central nervous systemic embolic events was reported in all of the included studies. Treatment with a factor Xa inhibitor significantly decreased the number of strokes and systemic embolic events compared with dose-adjusted warfarin in participants with AF (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.97; 13 studies; 67,477 participants; high-quality evidence).Treatment with a factor Xa inhibitor significantly reduced the number of major bleedings compared with warfarin (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.84; 13 studies; 67,396 participants; moderate-quality evidence). There was, however, statistically significant and high heterogeneity (I2 = 83%). When we repeated this analysis using a random-effects model, it did not show a statistically significant decrease in the number of major bleedings (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.17). A pre-specified sensitivity analysis excluding all open-label studies showed that treatment with a factor Xa inhibitor significantly reduced the number of major bleedings compared with warfarin (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.81), but high heterogeneity was also observed in this analysis (I2 = 72%). The same sensitivity analysis using a random-effects model also showed a statistically significant decrease in the number of major bleedings in participants treated with factor Xa inhibitors (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.96).Treatment with a factor Xa inhibitor significantly reduced the risk of intracranial haemorrhages (ICHs) compared with warfarin (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.59; 12 studies; 66,259 participants; high-quality evidence). We observed moderate, but statistically significant heterogeneity (I2 = 55%). The pre-specified sensitivity analysis excluding open-label studies showed that treatment with a factor Xa inhibitor significantly reduced the number of ICHs compared with warfarin (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.56), with low, non-statistically significant heterogeneity (I2 = 27%).Treatment with a factor Xa inhibitor also significantly reduced the number of all-cause deaths compared with warfarin (OR 0.89, 95% 0.83 to 0.95; 10 studies; 65,624 participants; moderate-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with factor Xa inhibitors significantly reduced the number of strokes and systemic embolic events compared with warfarin in people with AF. The absolute effect of factor Xa inhibitors compared with warfarin treatment was, however, rather small. Factor Xa inhibitors also reduced the number of ICHs, all-cause deaths and major bleedings compared with warfarin, although the evidence for a reduction in the latter is less robust.

Percutaneous vascular interventions versus intravenous thrombolytic treatment for acute ischaemic stroke.

BACKGROUND: Most ischaemic strokes are caused by blockage of a cerebral artery by a thrombus. Intravenous administration of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator given within 4.5 hours is now standard treatment for this condition. Percutaneous vascular interventions use an intra-arterial, mechanical approach for thrombus disruption or removal (thrombectomy). Recent randomised trials indicate that percutaneous vascular interventions are superior to usual care (usual care usually included intravenous thrombolysis). However, intravenous thrombolysis was usually given in both arms of the trial and there was a lack of direct comparison of percutaneous vascular interventions with intravenous thrombolysis. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of percutaneous vascular interventions compared with intravenous thrombolytic treatment for acute ischaemic stroke. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last search: August 2018). In addition, in September 2017, we searched the following electronic databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index; and Stroke Trials Registry, and US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that directly compared a percutaneous vascular intervention with intravenous thrombolytic treatment in people with acute ischaemic stroke. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We obtained both published and unpublished data. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included four trials with 450 participants. Data on functional outcome and death at end of follow-up were available for 443 participants from three trials. Compared with intravenous thrombolytic therapy, percutaneous vascular intervention did not improve the proportion of participants with good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 2, risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.25, P = 0.92). The quality of evidence was low (outcome assessment was blinded, but not the treating physician or participants). At the end of follow-up, there was a non-significant increase in the proportion of participants who died in the percutaneous vascular intervention group (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.14, P = 0.21). The quality of evidence was low (wide confidence interval). There was no difference in the proportion of participants with symptomatic intracranial haemorrhages between the intervention and control groups (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.95, P = 0.97). The quality of evidence was low (wide confidence interval). Data on vascular status (recanalisation rate) were only available for seven participants from one trial; we considered this inadequate for statistical analyses. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The present review directly compared intravenous thrombolytic treatment with percutaneous vascular interventions for ischaemic stroke. We found no evidence from RCTs that percutaneous vascular interventions are superior to intravenous thrombolytic treatment with respect to functional outcome. Quality of evidence was low (outcome assessment was blinded, but not the treating physician or participants). New trials with adequate sample sizes are warranted because of the rapid development of new techniques and devices for such interventions.

Recanalisation therapies for wake-up stroke.

BACKGROUND: About one in five strokes occur during sleep (wake-up stroke). People with wake-up strokes have traditionally been considered ineligible for thrombolytic treatment because the time of stroke onset is unknown. However, some studies suggest that these people may benefit from recanalisation therapies. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of intravenous thrombolysis and other recanalisation therapies versus control in people with acute ischaemic stroke presenting on awakening. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last search: 9 January 2018). In addition, we searched the following electronic databases in December 2017: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 11) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), the ISRCTN registry, and Stroke Trials Registry. We also screened references lists of relevant trials, contacted trialists, undertook forward tracking of relevant references, and contacted manufacturers of relevant devices and equipment. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of intravenous thrombolytic drugs or intra-arterial therapies in people with acute ischaemic stroke presenting upon awakening. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed trial quality and risk of bias using the GRADE approach. We obtained both published and unpublished data. MAIN RESULTS: We included one pilot trial with nine participants. The trial was a feasibility trial that included participants with an unknown onset of stroke and signs on perfusion computed tomography of ischaemic tissue at risk of infarction, who were randomised to alteplase (0.9 mg/kg) or placebo. One trial was prematurely terminated due to signs of efficacy of the intervention arm; we did not include this trial because we were not able to obtain data for the portion of the participants with wake-up stroke after requesting this information from the trial authors. We identified six ongoing trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised controlled trials for recommendations concerning recanalisation therapies for wake-up stroke. Results from ongoing trials will hopefully establish the efficacy and safety of such therapies.