Reperfusion therapies in patients with acute ischaemic stroke and atrial fibrillation: data on safety and effectiveness from a multi-centre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and/or endovascular therapy (EVT) are currently considered best practices in acute stroke patients. Data regarding the efficacy and safety of reperfusion therapies in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are conflicting as regards haemorrhagic transformation, mortality, and functional outcome. This study sought to investigate for any differences, in terms of safety and effectiveness, between AF patients with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) treated and untreated with reperfusion therapies. METHODS: Data from two multicenter cohort studies (RAF and RAF-NOACs) on consecutive patients with AF and AIS were analyzed to compare patients treated and not treated with reperfusion therapies (IVT and/or EVT). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors for outcome events: 90-day good functional outcome and mortality. A propensity score matching (PSM) analysis compared treated and untreated patients. RESULTS: Overall, 441 (25.4%) were included in the reperfusion-treated group and 1,295 (74.6%) in the untreated group. The multivariable model suggested that reperfusion therapies were significantly associated with good functional outcome. Rates of mortality and disability were higher in patients not treated, especially in the case of higher NIHSS scores. In the PSM comparison, 173/250 patients (69.2%) who had received reperfusion therapies had good functional outcome at 90 days, compared to 146/250 (58.4%) untreated patients (p = 0.009, OR: 1.60, 95% CI:1.11-2.31). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with AF and AIS treated with reperfusion therapies had a significantly higher rate of good functional outcome and lower rates of mortality compared to those patients with AF and AIS who had undergone conservative treatment.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcome trials.

BACKGROUND: In patients surviving stroke, approximately 15% and 60% exhibit concurrent diabetes mellitus and overweight/obesity, respectively, necessitating heightened secondary prevention efforts. Despite glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) demonstrating improved outcomes for those with diabetes mellitus or obesity, their underutilization persists among eligible individuals. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the impact of GLP-1 RAs on stroke risk. The findings aim to optimize the implementation of this therapeutic strategy in patients surviving stroke with diabetes mellitus or obesity. METHODS: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, we systematically reviewed MEDLINE and Scopus until 15 November 2023. Eligible studies included randomized cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) with individuals, with or without type 2 diabetes, randomized to either GLP-1 RA or placebo. The outcomes were total strokes, non-fatal strokes, and fatal strokes. Analyses were conducted using RevMan 5.4.1. RESULTS: Among 1369 screened studies, 11 were eligible, encompassing 82,140 participants (34.6% women) with a cumulative follow-up of 247,596 person-years. In the GLP-1 RAs group, the stroke rate was significantly lower compared to placebo (RR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.77-0.93; NNT: 200), showing no heterogeneity or interaction with administration frequency (daily vs weekly). In addition, the GLP-1 RAs group exhibited a significantly lower rate of non-fatal strokes compared to placebo (RR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.79-0.95; NNT: 250), with no heterogeneity or interaction based on administration frequency, route (oral vs subcutaneous), or diabetes presence. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of 11 CVOTs with 82,140 participants, GLP-1 RAs demonstrated a 16% relative reduction in stroke risk compared to placebo. This finding may increase implementation of GLP-1 RAs by stroke specialists in individuals with stroke and comorbid diabetes mellitus or obesity. DATA ACCESS STATEMENT: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in heart failure patients across the range of body mass index: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors improve outcomes in patients with heart failure, with or without diabetes. We sought to assess whether there is an interaction of these effects with body mass index (BMI). A systematic review of the MEDLINE and Scopus databases (last search: November 15th, 2022) was performed according to the PRISMA statement. Studies eligible for this review were randomized control trials (RCTs) with patients with chronic heart failure with either preserved or reduced ejection fraction randomly assigned to SGLT2 inhibitors or placebo. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. BMI was classified according to the WHO classification into under/normal weight (BMI: < 25 kg/m2), overweight (BMI: 25-29.9 kg/m2), obesity class I (BMI: 30-34.9 kg/m2), and obesity classes II/III (BMI: ≥ 35 kg/m2). All analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4. Among 1461 studies identified in the literature search, 3 were eligible and included in the meta-analysis. Among 14,737 patients (32.2% were women), 7,367 were randomized to an SGLT2 inhibitor (dapagliflozin or empagliflozin) and 7,370 to placebo. There were significantly fewer hospitalizations for HF (OR: 0.70, 95%CI: 0.64-0.76), cardiovascular deaths (OR:0.86, 95%CI: 0.77-0.97) and all-cause deaths (OR:0.90, 95%CI: 0.82-0.98) in the SGLT2 inhibitors group compared to the placebo group, without any interaction with BMI group (test for subgroup differences: x2 = 1.79, p = 0.62; x2 = 0.27, p = 0.97; x2 = 0.39, p = 0.94, respectively). There is no interaction between the efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors and BMI in patients with HF with either preserved or reduced ejection fraction. SGLT2 inhibitors are associated with improved outcomes regardless of the BMI.Trial registration: PROSPERO ID: CRD42022383643.

Argatroban as an Add-On to rtPA in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Current treatment options for acute ischemic stroke, including intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and mechanical thrombectomy, have undoubtedly revolutionized stroke care. The need for additional treatment options has brought into the light direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) and, specifically, argatroban as a promising candidate. However, there is uncertainty regarding the safety of adding argatroban to IVT, mainly due to the increased hemorrhagic risk. In this study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the safety and efficacy of argatroban as an add-on treatment for IVT. The following databases were searched from inception until the 14th of May 2023: Pubmed/MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, the EU Clinical Trials Register, EMBASE/Scopus, and the Cochrane Library. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) enrolling patients with acute ischemic stroke who underwent IVT evaluating the add-on use of any DTIs were selected for the systematic review and further meta-analysis. The PRISMA guidelines were followed at all stages. Four studies with argatroban were included in the final analysis. Analysis of risk ratio and relative risk shows that the add-on therapy with argatroban seems to be effective and favors a good clinical outcome (mRS 0-2) at 90 days, similar to that of alteplase. All studies showed a low pooled incidence of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (5%), parenchymal hematoma (3%), and other major bleeding (1%). Argatroban as an add-on treatment to IVT seems not to be associated with excessive bleeding risk; however, its efficacy remains unproven. According to this synopsis of the currently available evidence, it is premature to use argatroban as an add-on to IVT treatment outside the current clinical trial setting.