Effect of Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Ischemic Stroke Subtypes: A Post Hoc Subgroup Analysis From the RESIST Trial.

BACKGROUND: Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is a simple and noninvasive procedure that has proved to be safe and feasible in numerous smaller clinical trials. Mixed results have been found in recent large randomized controlled trials. This is a post hoc subgroup analysis of the RESIST trial (Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Patients With Acute Stroke), investigating the effect of RIC in different acute ischemic stroke etiologies, and whether an effect was modified by treatment adherence. METHODS: Eligible patients were adults (aged ≥18 years), independent in activities of daily living, who had prehospital stroke symptoms with a duration of less than 4 hours. They were randomized to RIC or sham. The RIC treatment protocol consisted of 5 cycles with 5 minutes of cuff inflation alternating with 5 minutes with a deflated cuff. Acceptable treatment adherence was defined as when at least 80% of planned RIC cycles were received. The analysis was performed using the entire range (shift analysis) of the modified Rankin Scale (ordinal logistic regression). RESULTS: A total of 698 had acute ischemic stroke, 253 (36%) were women, and the median (interquartile range) age was 73 (63-80) years. Median (interquartile range) overall adherence to RIC/sham was 91% (68%-100%). In patients with a stroke due to cerebral small vessel disease, who were adherent to treatment, RIC was associated with improved functional outcome, and the odds ratio for a shift to a lower score on the modified Rankin Scale was 2.54 (1.03-6.25); P=0.042. The association remained significant after adjusting for potential confounders. No significant associations were found with other stroke etiologies, and the overall test for interaction was not statistically significant (χ2, 4.33, P=0.23). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute ischemic stroke due to cerebral small vessel disease, who maintained good treatment adherence, RIC was associated with improved functional outcomes at 90 days. These results should only serve as a hypothesis-generating for future trials. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03481777.

Remote Ischemic Conditioning for Acute Stroke: The RESIST Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Despite some promising preclinical and clinical data, it remains uncertain whether remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) with transient cycles of limb ischemia and reperfusion is an effective treatment for acute stroke. Objective: To evaluate the effect of RIC when initiated in the prehospital setting and continued in the hospital on functional outcome in patients with acute stroke. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a randomized clinical trial conducted at 4 stroke centers in Denmark that included 1500 patients with prehospital stroke symptoms for less than 4 hours (enrolled March 16, 2018, to November 11, 2022; final follow-up, February 3, 2023). Intervention: The intervention was delivered using an inflatable cuff on 1 upper extremity (RIC cuff pressure, ≤200 mm Hg [n = 749] and sham cuff pressure, 20 mm Hg [n = 751]). Each treatment application consisted of 5 cycles of 5 minutes of cuff inflation followed by 5 minutes of cuff deflation. Treatment was started in the ambulance and repeated at least once in the hospital and then twice daily for 7 days among a subset of participants. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was improvement in functional outcome measured as a shift across the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score (range, 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]) at 90 days in the target population with a final diagnosis of ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke. Results: Among 1500 patients who were randomized (median age, 71 years; 591 women [41%]), 1433 (96%) completed the trial. Of these, 149 patients (10%) were diagnosed with transient ischemic attack and 382 (27%) with a stroke mimic. In the remaining 902 patients with a target diagnosis of stroke (737 [82%] with ischemic stroke and 165 [18%] with intracerebral hemorrhage), 436 underwent RIC and 466 sham treatment. The median mRS score at 90 days was 2 (IQR, 1-3) in the RIC group and 1 (IQR, 1-3) in the sham group. RIC treatment was not significantly associated with improved functional outcome at 90 days (odds ratio [OR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.20, P = .67; absolute difference in median mRS score, -1; -1.7 to -0.25). In all randomized patients, there were no significant differences in the number of serious adverse events: 169 patients (23.7%) in the RIC group with 1 or more serious adverse events vs 175 patients (24.3%) in the sham group (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.11; P = .68). Upper extremity pain during treatment and/or skin petechia occurred in 54 (7.2%) in the RIC group and 11 (1.5%) in the sham group. Conclusions and Relevance: RIC initiated in the prehospital setting and continued in the hospital did not significantly improve functional outcome at 90 days in patients with acute stroke. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03481777.

Atrial fibrillation detected by external loop recording for seven days or two-day simultaneous Holter recording: A comparison in patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac cause of ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (IS/TIA). AIM: To compare the diagnostic value of seven-day external loop recording (ELR) and two-day Holter recording for detecting AF after IS/TIA. METHODS: 191 IS/TIA patients without AF history. Endpoint was AF >30s. We started two-day Holter recording and seven-day ELR simultaneously. RESULTS: Seven-day ELR and two-day Holter recording detected the same three AF patients. ELR detected another six patients with AF adjudicated by cardiologists, four detections after Holter (3 vs. 7, p=0.125) and two false-positive detections during Holter. Seven-day ELR automatically classified 50/191 patients (26%) with AF, but only 7/50 (14%) were confirmed as AF by cardiologists. CONCLUSION: Seven-day ELR did not detect significantly more patients with AF than two-day Holter recording. 86% of patients with ELR-classified AF were false positives, indicating a poor performance of the automatic AF detection algorithm used.

External continuous ECG versus loop recording for atrial fibrillation detection in patients who had a stroke.

BACKGROUND: Detection of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients who had ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack (IS/TIA) is recommended. We aimed to compare external loop recording (ELR) against simultaneous continuous ECG recording for AF detection in patients who had acute IS/TIA and determine sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of AF detection using ELR. We hypothesised ELR to detect 15% fewer patients with AF than continuous ECG recording. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, we included 1412 patients who had acute IS/TIA without prior AF. Monitoring was 48 hours. Primary outcome was AF >30 s. Cardiologist verified AF in continuous ECG was gold standard. RESULTS: In continuous ECG, 38 (2.7%) patients had AF. ELR automatically categorised 219/1412 patients (15.5%) with AF, including 32/38 (85%) patients with AF in continuous ECG. After cardiologist adjudication of ELR recordings, AF was diagnosed in 57/219 patients, of which 32 (56%) had AF in continuous ECG. For adjudicated AF detection by ELR, sensitivity was 84%, 95% CI (69% to 94%), specificity was 98%, 95% CI (97% to 99%) and positive predictive value was 56%, 95% CI (42% to 69%). CONCLUSION: Automatic AF detection with ELR results in an AF diagnosis in more than five patients without AF for each patient with AF as verified in continuous ECG. For adjudicated AF detection by ELR, sensitivity was confirmed to 84% and specificity 98%. Automatic ELR as investigated in this study may be considered to rule out AF, but it is not suitable as a single monitoring device for AF screening in patients early after stroke. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02155907.