Effects of intensive blood pressure lowering on cerebral ischaemia in thrombolysed patients: insights from the ENCHANTED trial.

Background: Intensive blood pressure lowering may adversely affect evolving cerebral ischaemia. We aimed to determine whether intensive blood pressure lowering altered the size of cerebral infarction in the 2196 patients who participated in the Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke Study, an international randomised controlled trial of intensive (systolic target 130-140 mm Hg within 1 h; maintained for 72 h) or guideline-recommended (systolic target <180 mm Hg) blood pressure management in patients with hypertension (systolic blood pressure >150 mm Hg) after thrombolysis treatment for acute ischaemic stroke between March 3, 2012 and April 30, 2018. Methods: All available brain imaging were analysed centrally by expert readers. Log-linear regression was used to determine the effects of intensive blood pressure lowering on the size of cerebral infarction, with adjustment for potential confounders. The primary analysis pertained to follow-up computerised tomography (CT) scans done between 24 and 36 h. Sensitivity analysis were undertaken in patients with only a follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and either MRI or CT at 24-36 h, and in patients with any brain imaging done at any time during follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01422616. Findings: There were 1477 (67.3%) patients (mean age 67.7 [12.1] y; male 60%, Asian 65%) with available follow-up brain imaging for analysis, including 635 patients with a CT done at 24-36 h. Mean achieved systolic blood pressures over 1-24 h were 141 mm Hg and 149 mm Hg in the intensive group and guideline group, respectively. There was no effect of intensive blood pressure lowering on the median size (ml) of cerebral infarction on follow-up CT at 24-36 h (0.3 [IQR 0.0-16.6] in the intensive group and 0.9 [0.0-12.5] in the guideline group; log Δmean -0.17, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.43). The results were consistent in sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Interpretation: Intensive blood pressure lowering treatment to a systolic target <140 mm Hg within several hours after the onset of symptoms may not increase the size of cerebral infarction in patients who receive thrombolysis treatment for acute ischaemic stroke of mild to moderate neurological severity. Funding: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; UK Stroke Association; UK Dementia Research Institute; Ministry of Health and the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development of Brazil; Ministry for Health, Welfare, and Family Affairs of South Korea; Takeda.

Cost-Effectiveness of Low-Dose Compared to Standard-Dose Alteplase for Acute Ischemic Stroke in China: A Within-Trial Economic Evaluation of the ENCHANTED Study.

INTRODUCTION: The Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke Study (ENCHANTED) showed that a low-dose alteplase was safe but not clearly non-inferior to standard-dose alteplase in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Given the significant cost of this medicine, we undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the probability that low-dose is cost-effective relative to standard-dose alteplase in China. METHODS: For ENCHANTED participants in China with available health cost data, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were undertaken in which death or disability (modified Rankin scale scores 2-6) at 90 days and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used as outcome measures, respectively. There was adherence to standard guidelines for health economic evaluations alongside non-inferiority trials and according to a health-care payer's perspective. The equivalence margin for cost and effectiveness was set at USD 691 and -0.025 QALYs, respectively, for the base-case analysis. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the probability of low-dose alteplase being non-inferior. RESULTS: While the mean cost of alteplase was lower in the low-dose group (USD 1,569 vs. USD 2,154 in the standard-dose group), the total cost was USD 56 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1,000-1,113) higher compared to the standard-dose group due to higher hospitalization costs in the low-dose group. There were 462 (95% CI: 415-509) and 410 (95% CI: 363-457) patients with death or disability per 1,000 patients in the low-dose and standard-dose groups, respectively. The low-dose group had marginally lower (0.008, 95% CI: -0.016-0.001) QALYs compared to their standard-dose counterparts. The low-dose group was found to have an 88% probability of being non-inferior based on cost-effectiveness versus the standard-dose group. CONCLUSIONS: This health economic evaluation alongside the ENCHANTED indicates that the use of low-dose alteplase does not save overall healthcare costs nor lead to a gain in QALYs in the management of Chinese patients with AIS compared to the use of standard dose. There is little justification on economic grounds to shift from standard-of-care thrombolysis in AIS.

The value of process evaluation for public health interventions: field-case studies for non-communicable disease prevention and management in five countries.

Complex interventions are needed to effectively tackle non-communicable diseases. However, complex interventions can contain a mix of effective and ineffective actions. Process evaluation (PE) in public health research is of great value as it could clarify the mechanisms and contextual factors associ-ated with variation in the outcomes, better identify effective components, and inform adaptation of the intervention. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate the value of PE through five case studies that span the research cycle. The interven-tions include using digital health, salt reduction strategies, use of fixed dose combinations, and task shifting. Insights of the methods used, and the implications of the PE findings to the project, were discussed. PE of complex interventions can refute or confirm the hypothesized mechanisms of action, thereby enabling intervention refinement, and identifying implementation strategies that can address local contextual needs, so as to improve service delivery and public health outcomes.

Impact of COVID-2019 on stroke services in China: survey from the Chinese Stroke Association.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and physical distancing guidelines have compelled stroke practices worldwide to reshape their delivery of care significantly. We aimed to illustrate how the stroke services were interrupted during the pandemic in China. METHODS: A 61-item questionnaire designed on Wenjuanxing Form was completed by doctors or nurses who were involved in treating patients with stroke from 1 February to 31 March 2020. RESULTS: A total of 415 respondents completed the online survey after informed consent was obtained. Of the respondents, 37.8%, 35.2% and 27.0% were from mild, moderate and severe epidemic areas, respectively. Overall, the proportion of severe impact (reduction >50%) on the admission of transient ischaemic stroke, acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) and intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) was 45.0%, 32.0% and 27.5%, respectively. Those numbers were 36.9%, 27.9% and 22.3%; 36.5%, 22.1% and 22.6%; and 66.4%, 47.5% and 41.1% in mild, moderate and severe epidemic areas, respectively (all p<0.0001). For AIS, thrombolysis was moderate (20%-50% reduction) or severely impacted (>50%), as reported by 54.4% of the respondents, while thrombectomy was 39.3%. These were 44.4%, 26.3%; 44.2%, 39.4%; and 78.2%, 56.5%, in mild, moderate and severe epidemic areas, respectively (all p<0.0001). For patients with acute ICH, 39.8% reported the impact was severe or moderate for those eligible for surgery who had surgery. Those numbers were 27.4%, 39.0% and 58.1% in mild, moderate and severe epidemic areas, respectively. For staff resources, about 20% (overall) to 55% (severe epidemic) of the respondents reported moderate or severe impact on the on-duty doctors and nurses. CONCLUSION: We found a significant reduction of admission for all types of patients with stroke during the pandemic. Patients were less likely to receive appropriate care, for example, thrombolysis/thrombectomy, after being admitted to the hospital. Stroke service in severe COVID-19 epidemic areas, for example, Wuhan, was much more severely impacted compared with other regions in China.