Predictors of Good Clinical Outcome After Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke due to Tandem Lesion in Anterior Circulation: Results from the ASCENT Study.

PURPOSE: Endovascular treatment (EVT) of tandem lesion (TL) in anterior circulation (AC) acute ischemic stroke (AIS) represents still a clinical challenge. We aimed to evaluate selected factors related to EVT and assess other possible predictors of good clinical outcome besides the generally known ones. METHODS: AIS patients with TL in AC treated with EVT were enrolled in the multicenter retrospective ASCENT study. A good three-month clinical outcome was scored as 0-2 points in modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and achieved recanalization using the TICI scale. Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH) was assessed using the SITS-MOST criteria. Logistic regression analysis was used for the assessment of possible predictors of mRS 0-2 with adjustment for potential confounders. RESULTS: In total, 300 (68.7% males, mean age 67.3 ± 10.2 years) patients with median of admission NIHSS 17 were analyzed. Recanalization (TICI 2b-3) was achieved in 290 (96.7%) patients and 176 (58.7%) had mRS 0-2. Besides the age, admission NIHSS and SICH, admission glycemia (p = 0.005, OR: 0.884) the stent patency within the first 30 days after EVT (p = 0.0003, OR: 0.219), dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) started within 12 h after EVT (p < 0.0001, OR: 5.006) and statin therapy started within 24 h after stenting (p < 0.0001, OR: 5.558) were found as other predictors. CONCLUSION: Admission glycemia, start of DAPT within 12 h and statin therapy within 24 h after EVT, and stent patency within the first 30 days after EVT were found as other predictors of good three-month clinical outcome in AIS patients treated with EVT for TL.

Reperfusion Treatments in Disabling Versus Nondisabling Mild Stroke due to Anterior Circulation Vessel Occlusion.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of distinguishing between disabling versus nondisabling deficit in mild acute ischemic stroke due to endovascular thrombectomy-targetable vessel occlusion (EVT-tVO; including anterior circulation large and medium-vessel occlusion) is unknown. We compared safety and efficacy of acute reperfusion treatments in disabling versus nondisabling mild EVT-tVO. METHODS: From the Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke-International Stroke Thrombolysis Register, we included consecutive acute ischemic stroke patients (2015-2021) treated within 4.5 hours, with full NIHSS items availability and score ≤5, evidence of intracranial internal carotid artery, M1, A1-2, or M2-3 occlusion. After propensity score matching, we compared efficacy (3-month modified Rankin Scale score of 0-1, modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2, and early neurological improvement) and safety (nonhemorrhagic early neurological deterioration, any intracerebral or subarachnoid hemorrhage, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and death at 3-month) outcomes in disabling versus nondisabling patients-adopting an available definition. RESULTS: We included 1459 patients. Propensity score matched analysis of disabling versus nondisabling EVT-tVO (n=336 per group) found no significant differences in efficacy (modified Rankin Scale score 0-1: 67.4% versus 71.5%, P=0.336; modified Rankin Scale score 0-2: 77.1% versus 77.6%, P=0.895; early neurological improvement: 38.3% versus 44.4%, P=0.132) and safety (nonhemorrhagic early neurological deterioration: 8.5% versus 8.0%, P=0.830; any intracerebral hemorrhage or subarachnoid hemorrhage: 12.5% versus 13.3%, P=0.792; symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage: 2.6% versus 3.4%, P=0.598; and 3-month death: 9.8% versus 9.2%, P=0.844) outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We found similar safety and efficacy outcomes after acute reperfusion treatment in disabling versus nondisabling mild EVT-tVO; our findings suggest to adopt similar acute treatment approaches in the 2 groups. Randomized data are needed to clarify the best reperfusion treatment in mild EVT-tVO.

Excessive supraventricular activity and risk of atrial fibrillation in patients with cryptogenic ischaemic stroke.

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the leading causes of ischaemic stroke. However, screening for AF is often time-consuming in clinical practice. Therefore, the determination of an appropriate marker to detect the presence of AF would improve the diagnostic process. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy of prolonged and early inpatient event Holter monitoring in the detection of AF in patients with ESUS-related cryptogenic ischaemic stroke (CIS), and to determine the possible relationship between excessive supraventricular activity and AF detection. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All consecutive patients with documented cerebral or cerebellar infarction were included. The diagnostic work-up included brain neuroimaging (CT/MRI), ultrasound of the carotid and vertebral arteries, admission ECG followed by 24 hours of Holter monitoring, and transthoracic echocardiography. The 24-hour Holter ECG was analysed, and supraventricular ectopic activity (supraventricular extrasystoles, runs and pairs of supraventricular extrasystoles) was recorded in all patients. If these examinations did not reveal the cause of ischaemic stroke, the patients underwent subsequent prlonged 14-day event Holter recorder monitoring. RESULTS: We included 48 patients (mean age 69.9 ± 8.5 years, 60.4% men) who had been diagnosed with CIS. Of these 48 patients, atrial fibrillation was detected in seven (14.6%) during the prolonged 14-day Holter event monitoring. Patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation had a higher burden of supraventricular ectopic activity. The number of supraventricular extrasystoles (SVES) per hour, as well as the number of SV pairs and SV runs, was significantly higher in patients with new onset AF (p < 0.022; p < 0.043; p < 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, we confirmed that prolonged ECG event Holter monitoring in patients with CIS-ESUS subtype led to a higher rate of AF detection. Likewise, frequent supraventricular ectopic activity predicted the development of AF.

Comparison in detection of prodromal Parkinson's disease patients using original and updated MDS research criteria in two independent cohorts.

INTRODUCTION: MDS research criteria for prodromal Parkinson's disease (pPD) were published in 2015 and updated in 2019. We aimed to determine the difference in pPD patient detection rates in two cohorts recruited via gastrointestinal symptoms (PARCAS study) and the presence of a probable REM sleep behaviour disorder (PDBIOM study) using the original and updated criteria. METHODS: We evaluated all risk and prodromal markers, except genetic testing, plasma urate and physical inactivity, in both cohorts and DaT scan, diabetes mellitus type II and cognitive deficit in the PARCAS cohort. Thresholds of 50% probability for possible pPD and 80% for probable pPD were used. RESULTS: PPD status as identified by the original/updated criteria showed differences for probable pPD (n = 8/9; original/updated criteria) and possible pPD (n = 9/13) in the PARCAS cohort (total n = 158), as well as for probable pPD (n = 19/21) and possible pPD (n = 6/3) in the PDBIOM cohort (total n = 48). A high concordance rate was found between the two criteria sets (p < 0.001 for all groups). CONCLUSION: All probable pPD cases remained in the same category after evaluation with both criteria; three possible pPD cases based on the original criteria exceeded the threshold for probable pPD based on the updated criteria, and five possible new pPD cases were detected, with only one shift in the opposite direction. The updated MDS pPD research criteria tend to identify more patients as positive, yet their accuracy needs to be determined in prospective studies.

Predictors of outcome events and 6-year mortality after carotid endarterectomy and carotid stenting in patients with carotid artery stenosis.

AIM: The aim of our study was to evaluate the results of CEA and CAS in patients with carotid artery stenosis, and their effect on long-term mortality and morbidity, as well as to identify predictors of long-term mortality in a single-centre observational study. CLINICAL RATIONALE: While data on short-term morbidity and mortality after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) is robust, there is only a limited amount of literature on long-term mortality and its predictors five years-plus post these procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis treated with CEA or CAS in a single centre in eastern Slovakia between 2012 and 2014 were included. We recorded basic sociodemographic data, the presence of co-morbidities and periprocedural complications. Clinical and sonographic follow-up was performed three and 12 months after the procedures. Patient survival data and any stroke data was obtained at the end of a six-year follow-up. RESULTS: We included 259 patients after CEA (mean age 67.4 ± 8.5, 64.5% men) and 321 after CAS (mean age 66.9 ± 8.4, 73.5% men). We did not identify a statistically significant difference in short-term or long-term mortality, survival times, or the presence of short-term or long-term complications between the CEA and CAS groups. Predictors of long-term mortality included age and diabetes mellitus in both cohorts. Repeated interventions were related to increased mortality only in the CAS cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study show that long-term mortality does not differ between CEA and CAS.

Dabigatran initiation in patients with non-valvular AF and first acute ischaemic stroke: a retrospective observational study from the SITS registry.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The optimal timing for initiation of dabigatran after acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) is not established. We aimed to evaluate initiation timing and clinical outcomes of dabigatran in AIS patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). DESIGN: Retrospective study based on prospectively collected data in SITS (Safe Implementation of Treatment in Stroke) Thrombolysis and Thrombectomy Registry from July 2014 to July 2018. PARTICIPANTS: European NVAF patients (≥18 years) hospitalised after first-ever ischaemic stroke. SETTING: A multinational, observational monitoring register. INTERVENTION: Dabigatran initiation within 3 months after the ischaemic stroke. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was time from first-ever ischaemic stroke (index event) to dabigatran initiation. Additional outcomes included physicians' reasons for delaying dabigatran initiation beyond acute hospital discharge and outcomes within 3 months of index event. METHODS: We identified patients with NVAF who received dabigatran within 3 months of the index event. We performed descriptive statistics for baseline and demographic data and clinical outcomes after dabigatran initiation. RESULTS: In total, 1489 patients with NVAF received dabigatran after AIS treated with thrombolysis and/or thrombectomy. Of these, 1240 had available initiation time. At baseline, median age was 75 years; 53% of patients were women, 15% were receiving an oral anticoagulant, 29% acetylsalicylic acid and 4% clopidogrel. Most patients (82%) initiated dabigatran within 14 days after the index event. Patients initiating earlier had lower stroke severity from median NIHSS 8 (IQR 6-13) if initiated within 7 days to NIHSS 15 (9-19) if initiated between 28 days and 3 months. Most common reasons for delaying initiation were haemorrhagic transformation or intracranial haemorrhage, stroke severity and infarct size. Few thrombotic/haemorrhagic events occurred within 3 months after the index event (20 of 926 patients, 2.2% with the available data). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings, together with previous observational studies, indicate that dabigatran initiated within the first days after an AIS is safe in patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis, endovascular thrombectomy or both. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: SITS Thrombolysis and Thrombectomy Registry (NCT03258645).

Prevalence of Prodromal Parkinson's Disease as Defined by MDS Research Criteria among Elderly Patients Undergoing Colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal symptoms are a well-recognized and common premotor feature of Parkinson's disease (PD). Moreover, multiple studies have assessed the value of colonic α-synuclein as a potential marker of prodromal PD. Recently, the International Parkinson and Movement Disorders Society (MDS) defined research criteria for prodromal PD. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to test the MDS research criteria in patients undergoing diagnostic colonoscopies as potential candidates for inclusion in prospective trials evaluating colonic biopsies as a potential biomarker of prodromal PD. METHODS: We evaluated elderly patients without manifest parkinsonism undergoing diagnostic colonoscopies. During the study we assessed all risks and prodromal markers of the MDS research criteria, excluding radiotracer imaging and genetic testing. RESULTS: The mean age of the 100 enrolled patients was 61.6±9.7 years; 42 were men. The most common prodromal marker in our cohort was constipation (40%), followed by MDS-UPDRS part III scores of >6 points, excluding action tremor items (39%) and hyposmia (37%). Substantia nigra hyperechogenicity was identified in 9%, and polysomnography confirmed REM sleep behavior disorder in 2% of the patients. Five of the 100 enrolled patients (5%) fulfilled the criteria for probable prodromal PD, while another 3 patients met the 50% probability threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest, that the prevalence of prodromal PD in patients undergoing diagnostic colonoscopies may be higher compared to the general elderly population, although this should be confirmed in further studies including also matched controls not undergoing colonoscopy. The real prevalence of prodromal PD in this cohort will have to be confirmed in longitudinal follow-up. Patients undergoing diagnostic colonoscopies may be good candidates for multistep screening and inclusion in prospective trials.

Remote pre-procedural ischemic stroke as the greatest risk in carotid­stenting­associated stroke and death: a single center's experience.

BACKGROUND: The goal of carotid artery stenting (CAS) is to decrease the stroke risk in patients with carotid stenosis. This procedure carries an immediate risk of stroke and death and many patients do not benefit from it, especially asymptomatic patients. It is crucial to accurately select the patients who would benefit from carotid procedure, and to rule out those for whom the procedure might be hazardous. Remote ischemic stroke is a known risk factor for stroke recurrence during surgery. The aim of our study was to determine the periprocedural complication risk (within 30 days after CAS) associated with carotid stenting (stroke, death) in patients with and without remote pre-procedural ischemic stroke, to analyze periprocedural risk in other specific patient subgroups treated with CAS, and to determine the impact of observed variables on all-cause mortality during long-term follow-up. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from all patients treated with protected CAS between June 20, 2008 and December 31, 2015. Patient age, gender, type of carotid stenosis (symptomatic versus asymptomatic), side of stenosis (right or left carotid artery), type of cerebral protection (proximal versus distal), presence of comorbidities (remote ischemic pre-procedural ischemic stroke, coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, peripheral artery disease), previous ipsilateral carotid endarterectomy (CEA), contralateral carotid occlusion (CCO) and previous contralateral CAS/CEA were analyzed to identify higher CAS risk and to determine the impact of these variables on all-cause mortality during follow-up. Survival data were obtained from the Health Care Surveillance Authority registry. Mean follow-up was 1054 days (interquartile range 547.3; 1454.8). Remote pre-procedural ischemic stroke was defined as any-territory ischemic stroke >6 months prior to CAS. RESULTS: Primary periprocedural endpoint incidence (stroke/death) in 502 patients was 3.8% (N.=19) of all patients, 5.4% (N.=10) of symptomatic patients and 2.8% (N.=9) of asymptomatic patients. The risk of periprocedural stroke/death was 3.4 times higher in patients with (N.=198) compared to patients without remote ischemic stroke (N.=304) (6.6% versus 2.0% of patients without remote ischemic stroke; P=0.008). Periprocedural stroke/death in symptomatic patients (N.=186) was non-significantly higher in patients with remote ischemic stroke (N.=76) compared with patients without remote ischemic stroke (N.=110) (7.9% versus 3.6%; P=0.206). Asymptomatic patients with remote ischemic stroke (N.=122) had a 5.6-time-higher periprocedural risk of stroke/death compared with asymptomatic patients without remote ischemic stroke (N.=194) (5.7% versus 1.0%; P=0.014). Patients ≥75 years (N.=83) had a 3.0-time-higher periprocedural risk of stroke/death compared with younger patients (N.=419) (8.4% versus 2.9%; P=0.015); a non-significant increase of periprocedural stroke/death was found in both symptomatic (N.=35) and asymptomatic (N.=48) elderly patients (11.4% versus 4.0%, P=0.078; and 6.3% versus 2.4%, P=0.124, respectively). Increased periprocedural risk of stroke/death was not documented in other analyzed patient subgroups. During long-term follow-up, a 1.5-time-higher mortality risk was found in patients with remote ischemic stroke compared with patients without remote ischemic stroke in multivariable analysis; other patient subgroups (except older versus younger patients) did not differ in long-term mortality following carotid stenting. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, all patients with remote pre-procedural any-territory ischemic stroke belong to risky subgroup for periprocedural stroke death after CAS. All asymptomatic patients with remote ischemic stroke should not be treated with CAS. Remote ischemic stroke increases all-cause mortality in long-term follow-up after carotid stenting. Patients aged ≥75 years also have increased risk of periprocedural stroke and death after CAS. These factors should help us to be more selective when planning carotid procedures.