Incidence and outcome of perforations during medium vessel occlusion compared with large vessel occlusion thrombectomy.

BACKGROUND: Vessel perforation during thrombectomy is a severe complication and is hypothesized to be more frequent during medium vessel occlusion (MeVO) thrombectomy. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence and outcome of patients with perforation during MeVO and large vessel occlusion (LVO) thrombectomy and to report on the procedural steps that led to perforation. METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, data of consecutive patients with vessel perforation during thrombectomy between January 1, 2015 and September 30, 2022 were collected. The primary outcomes were independent functional outcome (ie, modified Rankin Scale 0-2) and all-cause mortality at 90 days. Binomial test, chi-squared test and t-test for unpaired samples were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: During 25 769 thrombectomies (5124 MeVO, 20 645 LVO) in 25 stroke centers, perforation occurred in 335 patients (1.3%; mean age 72 years, 62% female). Perforation occurred more often in MeVO thrombectomy (2.4%) than in LVO thrombectomy (1.0%, p<0.001). More MeVO than LVO patients with perforation achieved functional independence at 3 months (25.7% vs 10.9%, p=0.001). All-cause mortality did not differ between groups (overall 51.6%). Navigation beyond the occlusion and retraction of stent retriever/aspiration catheter were the two most common procedural steps that led to perforation. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, perforation was approximately twice as frequent in MeVO than in LVO thrombectomy. Efforts to optimize the procedure may focus on navigation beyond the occlusion site and retraction of stent retriever/aspiration catheter. Further research is necessary in order to identify thrombectomy candidates at high risk of intraprocedural perforation and to provide data on the effectiveness of endovascular countermeasures.

Terson Syndrome: Not to Be Missed in Patients with Disorders of Consciousness.

The diagnosis of clinical cognitive motor dissociation (cCMD) can be hindered by pitfalls during standardized clinical evaluation based on gold-standard neurobehavioral rating scales. We introduce here a new pitfall, by reporting two cases of Terson syndrome (TS) after subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) caused by the rupture of an anterior communicant artery aneurysm, hospitalized in the Acute Neurorehabilitation Unit (ANR) of CHUV. TS is reported to occur in 8-19.3% of patients suffering from SAH. It can lead to significant visual impairment and if unrecognized, may impair the patient's capacity to interact appropriately with the environment; it thus presents an important pitfall in recognizing clinical cognitive-motor dissociation (cCMD) in patients with altered states of consciousness. An early ophthalmological exam should be considered in all patients with SAH and disorders of consciousness or visual complaints.

Goals of care changes after acute ischaemic stroke: decision frequency and predictors.

OBJECTIVES: Little is known about the factors leading to a change in goals of care (CGC) in patients with an acute ischaemic stroke (AIS). Our aim was to analyse the proportion and outcome of such patients and identify medical predictors of a CGC during acute hospitalisation. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients who had an AIS over a 13-year period from the prospectively constructed Acute Stroke Registry and Analysis of Lausanne. We compared patients with a CGC during the acute hospital phase to all other patients and identified associated clinical and radiological variables using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A CGC decision was taken in 440/4264 (10.3%) consecutive patients who had an AIS. The most powerful acute phase predictors of a CGC were transit through the intensive care unit, older age, pre-existing disability, higher stroke severity and initial decreased level of consciousness. Adding subacute phase variables, we also identified active oncological disease, fever and poor recanalisation as predictors. 76.6% of the CGC patients died in the stroke unit and 1.0% of other patients, and 30.5% of patients with a CGC received a palliative care consultation. At 12 months, 93.6% of patients with CGC had died, compared with 10.1% of non-CGC patients. CONCLUSIONS: Over three-quarters of AIS patients with CGC died in hospital, but less than a third received a palliative care consultation. The identified clinical and radiological predictors of a CGC may allow physicians to initiate timely the decision-making process for a possible CGC.

Stroke in the stroke unit: Recognition, treatment and outcomes in a single-centre cohort.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In-hospital strokes (IHS) are associated with longer diagnosis times, treatment delays and poorer outcomes. Strokes occurring in the stroke unit have seldom been studied. Our aim was to assess the management of in-stroke-unit ischaemic stroke (ISUS) by analysing ISUS characteristics, delays in diagnosis, treatments and outcomes. METHODS: Consecutive patients from the Acute Stroke Registry and Analysis of Lausanne (ASTRAL), from January 2003 to June 2019, were classified as ISUS, other-IHS or community-onset stroke (COS). Baseline and stroke characteristics, time to imaging and time to treatment, missed treatment opportunities, treatment rates and outcomes were compared using multivariate analysis with adjustment for relevant clinical, imaging and laboratory data available in ASTRAL. RESULTS: Amongst the 3456 patients analysed, 138 (4.0%) were ISUS, 214 (6.2%) other-IHS and 3104 (89.8%) COS. In multivariate analysis, patients with ISUS more frequently had known stroke onset time than other-IHS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.44; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.39-4.35) or COS (aOR 2.56; 95% CI 1.59-4.17), had fewer missed treatment opportunities than other-IHS (aOR 0.22; 95% CI 0.06-0.86) and higher endovascular treatment (EVT) rates than COS (aOR 3.03; 95% CI 1.54-5.88). ISUS was associated with a favourable shift in the modified Rankin Scale at 3 months in comparison with other-IHS (aOR 1.73; 95% CI 1.11-2.69) or COS (aOR 1.46; 95% CI 1.00-2.12). CONCLUSION: In-stroke-unit ischaemic stroke more frequently had known stroke onset time than other-IHS or COS, fewer missed treatment opportunities than other-IHS and a higher EVT rate than COS. This readiness to identify and treat patients in the stroke unit may explain the better long-term outcome of ISUS.

Procedural Complications During Early Versus Late Endovascular Treatment in Acute Stroke: Frequency and Clinical Impact.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Endovascular treatment (EVT) in acute ischemic stroke is effective in the late time window in selected patients. However, the frequency and clinical impact of procedural complications in the early versus late time window has received little attention. METHODS: We retrospectively studied all acute ischemic strokes from 2015 to 2019 receiving EVT in the Acute Stroke Registry and Analysis of Lausanne. We compared the procedural EVT complications in the early (<6 hours) versus late (6-24 hours) window and correlated them with short-term clinical outcome. RESULTS: Among 695 acute ischemic strokes receiving EVT (of which 202 were in the late window), 113 (16.3%) had at least one procedural complication. The frequency of each single, and for overall procedural complications was similar for early versus late EVT (16.2% versus 16.3%, Padj=0.90). Procedural complications lead to a significantly less favorable short-term outcome, reflected by the absence of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale improvement in late EVT (delta-National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale-24 hours, -2.5 versus 2, Padj=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective analysis of consecutive EVT, the frequency of procedural complications was similar for early and late EVT patients but very short-term outcome seemed less favorable in late EVT patients with complications.

Characteristics and Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 and Acute Ischemic Stroke: The Global COVID-19 Stroke Registry.

Recent case-series of small size implied a pathophysiological association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and severe large-vessel acute ischemic stroke. Given that severe strokes are typically associated with poor prognosis and can be very efficiently treated with recanalization techniques, confirmation of this putative association is urgently warranted in a large representative patient cohort to alert stroke clinicians, and inform pre- and in-hospital acute stroke patient pathways. We pooled all consecutive patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and acute ischemic stroke in 28 sites from 16 countries. To assess whether stroke severity and outcomes (assessed at discharge or at the latest assessment for those patients still hospitalized) in patients with acute ischemic stroke are different between patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19, we performed 1:1 propensity score matching analyses of our COVID-19 patients with non-COVID-19 patients registered in the Acute Stroke Registry and Analysis of Lausanne Registry between 2003 and 2019. Between January 27, 2020, and May 19, 2020, 174 patients (median age 71.2 years; 37.9% females) with COVID-19 and acute ischemic stroke were hospitalized (median of 12 patients per site). The median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale was 10 (interquartile range [IQR], 4-18). In the 1:1 matched sample of 336 patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19, the median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale was higher in patients with COVID-19 (10 [IQR, 4-18] versus 6 [IQR, 3-14]), P=0.03; (odds ratio, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.08-2.65] for higher National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score). There were 48 (27.6%) deaths, of which 22 were attributed to COVID-19 and 26 to stroke. Among 96 survivors with available information about disability status, 49 (51%) had severe disability at discharge. In the propensity score-matched population (n=330), patients with COVID-19 had higher risk for severe disability (median mRS 4 [IQR, 2-6] versus 2 [IQR, 1-4], P<0.001) and death (odds ratio, 4.3 [95% CI, 2.22-8.30]) compared with patients without COVID-19. Our findings suggest that COVID-19 associated ischemic strokes are more severe with worse functional outcome and higher mortality than non-COVID-19 ischemic strokes.