Transcarotid Arterial Revascularization of Symptomatic Internal Carotid Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Study-Level Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) is an interventional therapy for symptomatic internal carotid artery disease. Currently, the utilization of TCAR is contentious due to limited evidence. In this study, we evaluate the safety and efficacy of TCAR in patients with symptomatic internal carotid artery disease compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS). METHODS: A systematic review was conducted, spanning from January 2000 to February 2023, encompassing studies that used TCAR for the treatment of symptomatic internal carotid artery disease. The primary outcomes included a 30-day stroke or transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction, and mortality. Secondary outcomes comprised cranial nerve injury and major bleeding. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) for each outcome were calculated to compare TCAR with CEA and CAS. Furthermore, subgroup analyses were performed based on age and degree of stenosis. In addition, a sensitivity analysis was conducted by excluding the vascular quality initiative registry population. RESULTS: A total of 7 studies involving 24 246 patients were analyzed. Within this patient cohort, 4771 individuals underwent TCAR, 12 350 underwent CEA, and 7125 patients underwent CAS. Compared with CAS, TCAR was associated with a similar rate of stroke or transient ischemic attack (OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.33-1.82]) and myocardial infarction (OR, 1.29 [95% CI, 0.83-2.01]) but lower mortality (OR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.22-0.81]). Compared with CEA, TCAR was associated with a higher rate of stroke or transient ischemic attack (OR, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.03-1.54]) but similar rates of myocardial infarction (OR, 0.9 [95% CI, 0.64-1.38]) and mortality (OR, 1.35 [95% CI, 0.87-2.10]). CONCLUSIONS: Although CEA has traditionally been considered superior to stenting for symptomatic carotid stenosis, TCAR may have some advantages over CAS. Prospective randomized trials comparing the 3 modalities are needed.

Analysis of IDH and EGFR as biomarkers in glioblastoma multiforme: A case-control study.

Background: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a very aggressive primary central nervous system (CNS) tumor with limited therapeutic options and poor prognosis. This study aimed to analyze the association between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), including IDH1 rs121913500C > T, IDH2 rs11540478G > A, and EGFR rs1468727C > T, and their association on the risk and overall survival of GBM patients in Jordan. Methods: Using a case-control study design involving 63 GBM patients and 226 healthy controls was conducted at King Abdullah University Hospital in Jordan. DNA extraction was performed using formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tissue for GBM samples and blood samples for controls. SNPs analysis was performed using the Sequenom iPLEX assay sequencing technique. Survival outcomes were assessed using Cox models and hazard ratios (HR), and single-cell RNA (scRNA) analysis was performed from GSE70630. Results: The study showed a significant association between genotype frequency in GBM cases and controls for specific SNPs, including IDH1 rs121913500C > T, and EGFR rs1468727C > T. The G/G genotype of rs11540478 (IDH2) was associated with better prognostic outcomes in GBM patients. The scRNA analysis demonstrated the differential expression of IDH1, IDH2, and EGFR in GBM, with enrichment in central carbon metabolism in cancer. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that SNPs, particularly in IDH1 and IDH2 genes and EGFR, may serve as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for GBM. While the study underscores the clinical relevance of these genetic variants, further investigations with larger and more diverse populations are essential to validate and extend these associations.

Intraoperative neuromonitoring as real-time diagnostic for cerebral ischemia in endovascular treatment of ruptured brain aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) during endovascular treatment (EVT) of ruptured intracranial aneurysms (rIA). METHODS: IONM and clinical data from 323 patients who underwent EVT for rIA from 2014-2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Significant IONM changes and outcomes were evaluated based on visual review of data and clinical documentation. RESULTS: Of the 323 patients undergoing EVT, significant IONM changes were noted in 30 patients (9.29%) and 46 (14.24%) experienced postprocedural neurological deficits (PPND). 22 out of 30 (73.33%) patients who had significant IONM changes experienced PPND. Univariable analysis showed changes in somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) and electroencephalogram (EEG) were associated with PPND (p-values: <0.001 and <0.001, retrospectively). Multivariable analysis showed that IONM changes were significantly associated with PPND (Odd ratio (OR) 20.18 (95%CI:7.40-55.03, p-value: <0.001)). Simultaneous changes in both IONM modalities had specificity of 98.9% (95% CI: 97.1%-99.7%). While sensitivity when either modality had a change was 47.8% (95% CI: 33.9%-62.0%) to predict PPND. CONCLUSIONS: Significant IONM changes during EVT for rIA are associated with an increased risk of PPND. SIGNIFICANCE: IONM can be used confidently as a real time neurophysiological diagnostic guide for impending neurological deficits during EVT treatment of rIA.

Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke in Patients With Recent Direct Oral Anticoagulant Use: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) is an effective stroke therapy that remains underused. Currently, the use of IVT in patients with recent direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) intake is not recommended. In this study we aim to investigate the safety and efficacy of IVT in patients with acute ischemic stroke and recent DOAC use. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of proportions evaluating IVT with recent DOAC use was conducted. Outcomes included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, any intracranial hemorrhage, serious systemic bleeding, and 90-day functional independence (modified Rankin scale score 0-2). Additionally, rates were compared between patients receiving IVT using DOAC and non-DOAC by a random effect meta-analysis to calculate pooled odds ratios (OR) for each outcome. Finally, sensitivity analysis for idarucizumab, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, and timing of DOAC administration was completed. Fourteen studies with 247 079 patients were included (3610 in DOAC and 243 469 in non-DOAC). The rates of IVT complications in the DOAC group were 3% (95% CI, 3-4) symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, 12% (95% CI, 7-19) any ICH, and 0.7% (95%CI, 0-1) serious systemic bleeding, and 90-day functional independence was achieved in 57% (95% CI, 43-70). The rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (3.4 versus 3.5%; OR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.67-1.36]), any intracranial hemorrhage (17.7 versus 17.3%; OR, 1.23 [95% CI, 0.61-2.48]), serious systemic bleeding (0.7 versus 0.6%; OR, 1.27 [95% CI, 0.79-2.02]), and 90-day modified Rankin scale score 0-2 (46.4 versus 56.8%; OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.400-3.67]) did not differ between DOAC and non-DOAC groups. There was no difference in symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage rate based on idarucizumab administration. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with IVT in recent DOAC versus non-DOAC use have similar rates of hemorrhagic complications and functional independence. Further prospective randomized trials are warranted.