Effectiveness of endovascular treatment for in-hospital stroke vs. community-onset stroke: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of endovascular treatment for in-hospital stroke remains debatable. We aimed to compare the outcomes between patients with in-hospital stroke and community-onset stroke who received endovascular treatment. METHODS: This prospective registry-based cohort study included consecutive patients who underwent endovascular treatment from January 2013 to December 2022 and were registered in the Selection Criteria in Endovascular Thrombectomy and Thrombolytic Therapy study and Yonsei Stroke Cohort. Functional outcomes at day 90, radiological outcomes, and safety outcomes were compared between the in-hospital and community-onset groups using logistic regression and propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS: Of 1,219 patients who underwent endovascular treatment, 117 (9.6%) had in-hospital stroke. Patients with in-hospital onset were more likely to have a pre-stroke disability and active cancer than those with community-onset. The interval from the last known well to puncture was shorter in the in-hospital group than in the community-onset group (155 vs. 355 min, p<0.001). No significant differences in successful recanalization or safety outcomes were observed between the groups; however, the in-hospital group exhibited worse functional outcomes and higher mortality at day 90 than the community-onset group (all p<0.05). After propensity score matching including baseline characteristics, functional outcomes after endovascular treatment did not differ between the groups (OR: 1.19, 95% CI 0.78-1.83, p=0.4). Safety outcomes did not significantly differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: Endovascular treatment is a safe and effective treatment for eligible patients with in-hospital stroke. Our results will help physicians in making decisions when planning treatment and counseling caregivers or patients.

Immediate and Long-Term Outcomes of Reperfusion Therapy in Patients With Cancer.

Background and Purpose: Patients with acute stroke are often accompanied by comorbidities, such as active cancer. However, adequate treatment guidelines are not available for these patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between cancer and the outcomes of reperfusion therapy in patients with stroke. Methods: We compared treatment outcomes in patients who underwent reperfusion therapy, using a nationwide reperfusion therapy registry. We divided the patients into 3 groups according to cancer activity: active cancer, nonactive cancer, and without a history of cancer. We investigated reperfusion processes, 24-hour neurological improvement, adverse events, 3-month functional outcome, and 6-month survival and related factors after reperfusion therapy. Results: Among 1338 patients who underwent reperfusion therapy, 62 patients (4.6%) had active cancer, 78 patients (5.8%) had nonactive cancer, and 1198 patients (89.5%) had no history of cancer. Of the enrolled patients, 969 patients received intravenous thrombolysis and 685 patients underwent endovascular treatment (316 patients received combined therapy). Patients with active cancer had more comorbidities and experienced more severe strokes; however, they showed similar 24-hour neurological improvement and adverse events, including cerebral hemorrhage, compared with the other groups. Although the functional outcome at 3 months was poorer than the other groups, 36.4% of patients with active cancer showed functional independence. Additionally, 52.9% of the patients with determined stroke etiology showed functional independence despite active cancer. During the 6-month follow-up, 46.6% of patients with active cancer died, and active cancer was independently associated with poor survival (hazard ratio, 3.973 [95% CI, 2.528­6.245]). Conclusions: In patients with active cancer, reperfusion therapy showed similar adverse events and short-term outcomes to that of other groups. While long-term prognosis was worse in the active cancer group than the nonactive cancer groups, not negligible number of patients had good functional outcomes, especially those with determined stroke mechanisms.

Outcome of Stroke Patients with Cancer and Nonbacterial Thrombotic Endocarditis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Nonbacterial thrombotic endocarditis (NBTE) is a cause of stroke in cancer. However, clinical characteristics and outcomes in stroke patients with cancer-associated NBTE are not well known. METHODS: We included consecutive patients with stroke and active cancer over a 9-year period who underwent echocardiography. We retrospectively compared clinical characteristics and presence of metastasis between patients with NBTE, those with cryptogenic etiologies, and those with determined etiologies. We also investigated mortality and stroke events during the 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Among the 245 patients, 20 had NBTE, 96 had cryptogenic etiologies, and 129 had determined etiologies. Metastasis was seen in all 20 patients (100%) with NBTE, 69.8% in patients with cryptogenic etiology, and 48.8% in patients with or determined etiology. During the 6-month follow-up, 127 patients (51.8%) developed stroke and/or died (death in 110 [44.9%] and stroke events in 55 [22.4%]). Patients with NBTE showed significantly higher mortality (80%) and stroke occurrence (50%) than those with cryptogenic etiologies (mortality 54.2%, stroke 25.0%, log-rank P=0.006) and determined etiologies (mortality 32.6%, stroke 16.3%, log-rank P<0.001). In a multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis, the presence of NBTE was independently associated with composite outcomes of mortality and stroke events (hazard ratio, 1.941; 95% confidence interval, 1.052 to 3.690). CONCLUSIONS: NBTE should be suspected as a potential cause of stroke in patients with metastatic cancer. Patients with NBTE have a high risk of recurrent stroke and mortality. Future studies are necessary to determine strategies to reduce stroke recurrence in patients with NBTE.

Intracranial Meningioma-induced Parkinsonism.

An intracranial tumor is a rare cause of secondary parkinsonism. Our patient presented to our clinic for recently-developed asymmetric parkinsonism without pyramidal signs. However, a meningioma located in the sphenoidal ridge was identified upon imaging studies. This case suggests that additional causes should be considered when approaching patients with parkinsonism and that imaging studies can provide useful information to make accurate diagnoses.