Intravenous Thrombolysis 4.5-9 Hours After Stroke Onset: A Cohort Study from the TRISP Collaboration.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and effectiveness of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) >4.5-9 hours after stroke onset, and the relevance of advanced neuroimaging for patient selection. METHODS: Prospective multicenter cohort study from the ThRombolysis in Ischemic Stroke Patients (TRISP) collaboration. Outcomes were symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, poor 3-month functional outcome (modified Rankin scale 3-6) and mortality. We compared: (i) IVT >4.5-9 hours versus 0-4.5 hours after stroke onset and (ii) within the >4.5-9 hours group baseline advanced neuroimaging (computed tomography perfusion, magnetic resonance perfusion or magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging fluid-attenuated inversion recovery) versus non-advanced neuroimaging. RESULTS: Of 15,827 patients, 663 (4.2%) received IVT >4.5-9 hours and 15,164 (95.8%) within 4.5 hours after stroke onset. The main baseline characteristics were evenly distributed between both groups. Time of stroke onset was known in 74.9% of patients treated between >4.5 and 9 hours. Using propensity score weighted binary logistic regression analysis (onset-to-treatment time >4.5-9 hours vs onset-to-treatment time 0-4.5 hours), the probability of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (ORadjusted 0.80, 95% CI 0.53-1.17), poor functional outcome (ORadjusted 1.01, 95% CI 0.83-1.22), and mortality (ORadjusted 0.80, 95% CI 0.61-1.04) did not differ significantly between both groups. In patients treated between >4.5 and 9 hours, the use of advanced neuroimaging was associated with a 50% lower mortality compared with non-advanced imaging only (9.9% vs 19.7%; ORadjusted 0.51, 95% CI 0.33-0.79). INTERPRETATION: This study showed no evidence in difference of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, poor outcome, and mortality in selected stroke patients treated with IVT between >4.5 and 9 hours after stroke onset compared with those treated within 4.5 hours. Advanced neuroimaging for patient selection was associated with lower mortality. ANN NEUROL 2023;94:309-320.

Sex-Based Analysis of Treatment, Time Metrics, and Outcomes in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated in the Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: Sex disparities in stroke treatment have gained increasing interest, especially since women have worse post-stroke functional outcomes compared with men. Existing studies provide conflicting evidence, with some indicating women have longer delays and less often receive acute treatment, whereas others show no differences between men and women. We aimed to explore sex differences in acute treatment modalities and time metrics of patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in a real-world setting. Second, we examined whether functional outcomes differed by sex and whether this was influenced by treatment timing. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Dutch Acute Stroke Audit, a prospective consecutive registry of AIS patients from 72 hospitals in the Netherlands, between 2017 and 2020. We captured data on type of treatment administered (intravenous thrombolysis [IVT] and endovascular thrombectomy [EVT]), time metrics (onset-to-door time [OTDT], door-to-needle and door-to-groin times), and functional outcomes at 3 months (modified Rankin scale [mRS]). The association between sex and poor outcome (mRS 3-6) was assessed with Cox proportional hazard models stratified by type of treatment and adjusted for age, additionally for National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and OTDT. RESULTS: Of the 58,632 patients, 26,941 (46%) were women. Compared with men, women were older (mean age 74.6 vs. 71.0, p < 0.001) and presented with slightly higher NIHSS scores (median 3 [IQR 2-7] vs. 3 [IQR 1-6], p < 0.001). Treatment modalities distribution (no treatment, IVT, EVT) was similar between women and men (64; 29; 10 vs. 63; 30; 9%, p = 0.16). Women had a slightly longer OTDT (median 145 vs. 139 min, p < 0.01). Women had increased odds of poor outcomes (OR 1.49 [95% CI: 1.43-1.56]). This was still statistically significant after adjusting for age and NIHSS score (OR 1.22 [95% CI: 1.16-1.28]). Neither treatment modality nor OTDT had an additional influence on this association. CONCLUSION: In this large real-world registry, we observed no differences in distribution of treatment modalities between sexes. We did find a minor pre-hospital delay in women and worse functional outcomes in women. The minor delay in OTDT does not fully explain the observed worse outcomes in women. Our results provide reassurance that no major sex biases are apparent in acute stroke management throughout participating Dutch centers.

Impact of the lockdown on acute stroke treatments during the first surge of the COVID-19 outbreak in the Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated the impact of the Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the resulting lockdown on reperfusion treatments and door-to-treatment times during the first surge in Dutch comprehensive stroke centers. Furthermore, we studied the association between COVID-19-status and treatment times. METHODS: We included all patients receiving reperfusion treatment in 17 Dutch stroke centers from May 11th, 2017, until May 11th, 2020. We collected baseline characteristics, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) at admission, onset-to-door time (ODT), door-to-needle time (DNT), door-to-groin time (DGT) and COVID-19-status at admission. Parameters during the lockdown (March 15th, 2020 until May 11th, 2020) were compared with those in the same period in 2019, and between groups stratified by COVID-19-status. We used nationwide data and extrapolated our findings to the increasing trend of EVT numbers since May 2017. RESULTS: A decline of 14% was seen in reperfusion treatments during lockdown, with a decline in both IVT and EVT delivery. DGT increased by 12 min (50 to 62 min, p-value of < 0.001). Furthermore, median NIHSS-scores were higher in COVID-19 - suspected or positive patients (7 to 11, p-value of 0.004), door-to-treatment times did not differ significantly when stratified for COVID-19-status. CONCLUSIONS: During the first surge of the COVID-19 pandemic, a decline in acute reperfusion treatments and a delay in DGT was seen, which indicates a target for attention. It also appeared that COVID-19-positive or -suspected patients had more severe neurologic symptoms, whereas their EVT-workflow was not affected.

Maintenance of Acute Stroke Care Service During the COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown.

[Figure: see text].

Endovascular treatment in patients with acute ischemic stroke presenting beyond 6 h after symptom onset: An international multicenter cohort study of the EVA-TRISP collaboration.

INTRODUCTION: After positive findings in clinical trials the time window for endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for patients with an acute ischemic stroke has been expanded up to 24 h from symptom onset or last seen well (LSW). We aimed to compare EVT patients' characteristics and outcomes in the early versus extended time window and to compare outcomes with the DAWN and DEFUSE 3 trial results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive EVT patients from 16 mostly European comprehensive stroke centers from the EVA-TRISP cohort were included. We compared rates of 90-day good functional outcomes (Modified Rankin Scale 0-2), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and 90-day mortality between patients treated in the early (<6 h after onset or LSW) versus extended (6-24 h after onset or LSW) time windows. RESULTS: We included 9313 patients, of which 6876 were treated in the early and 2437 in the extended time window. National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score at presentation was lower in patients treated in the extended time window (median 13 [IQR 7-18] vs 15 [IQR 9-19], p < 0.001). The percentage of patients with good functional outcome was slightly lower in the extended time window (37.4% vs 42.2%, p < 0.001). However, rates of successful recanalization, sICH, and mortality were similar. Good functional outcome rates after EVT were slightly lower for patients in the extended window in the EVA-TRISP cohort as compared to DAWN and DEFUSE 3. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: According to this large multicenter cohort study reflecting daily clinical practice, EVT use in the extended time window appears safe and effective.

Performance feedback on the quality of care in hospitals performing thrombectomy for ischemic stroke (PERFEQTOS): protocol of a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Although the provision of performance feedback to healthcare professionals based on data from quality registries is common practice in many fields of medicine, observational studies of its effect on the quality of care have shown mixed results. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of performance feedback on the quality of care for acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: PERFEQTOS is a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial in 13 hospitals in the Netherlands providing endovascular thrombectomy for ischemic stroke. The primary outcome is the hospital's door-to-groin time. The study starts with a 6-month period in which none of the hospitals receives the performance feedback intervention. Subsequently, every 6 months, three or four hospitals are randomized to cross over from the control to the intervention conditions, until all hospitals receive the feedback intervention. The feedback intervention consists of a dashboard with quarterly reports on patient characteristics, structure, process, and outcome indicators related to patients with ischemic stroke treated with endovascular thrombectomy. Hospitals can compare their present performance with their own performance in the past and with other hospitals. The performance feedback is provided to local quality improvement teams in each hospital, who define their own targets on specific indicators and develop performance improvement plans. The impact of the performance feedback and improvement plans will be evaluated by comparing the primary outcome before and after the intervention. DISCUSSION: This study will provide evidence on the effectiveness of performance feedback to healthcare providers. The results will be actively disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations, and various stakeholder engagement activities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NL9090 . Registered on December 3, 2020.