Maintained acute stroke admission during the first wave COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden, a register-based study.

OBJECTIVES: Clinicians and researchers have addressed concerns about the negative impact of COVID-19 outbreaks on the ability of health care systems to provide timely assessment and acute therapies to patients with stroke. The aim of this study is to describe stroke care during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the same period the year before at an acute care hospital in Sweden. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this cohort study data were collected from March 1st to August 31st in 2019 and 2020 on all patients diagnosed with stroke and TIA and registered at Danderyd Hospital in the national quality registry (Riksstroke). Data were completed with information from the hospital record. Sweden had no lockdown during 2020. RESULTS: During the study period in year 2019 there were 426 registered stroke patients at Danderyd hospital, compared to 403 registered stroke patients the same period during 2020 (p = 0.483). The number of minor stroke and TIA during the period in 2019 compared to 2020 were 468 versus 453 respectively (minor stroke p = 0.475 versus TIA p = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: There were no difference in the number of patients diagnosed with stroke and TIA during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

SARS-CoV-2 induces a durable and antigen specific humoral immunity after asymptomatic to mild COVID-19 infection.

Current SARS-CoV-2 serological assays generate discrepant results, and the longitudinal characteristics of antibodies targeting various antigens after asymptomatic to mild COVID-19 are yet to be established. This longitudinal cohort study including 1965 healthcare workers, of which 381 participants exhibited antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike antigen at study inclusion, reveal that these antibodies remain detectable in most participants, 96%, at least four months post infection, despite having had no or mild symptoms. Virus neutralization capacity was confirmed by microneutralization assay in 91% of study participants at least four months post infection. Contrary to antibodies targeting the spike protein, antibodies against the nucleocapsid protein were only detected in 80% of previously anti-nucleocapsid IgG positive healthcare workers. Both anti-spike and anti-nucleocapsid IgG levels were significantly higher in previously hospitalized COVID-19 patients four months post infection than in healthcare workers four months post infection (p = 2*10-23 and 2*10-13 respectively). Although the magnitude of humoral response was associated with disease severity, our findings support a durable and functional humoral response after SARS-CoV-2 infection even after no or mild symptoms. We further demonstrate differences in antibody kinetics depending on the antigen, arguing against the use of the nucleocapsid protein as target antigen in population-based SARS-CoV-2 serological surveys.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for stroke recovery.

BACKGROUND: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) might theoretically reduce post-stroke disability by direct effects on the brain. This Cochrane Review was first published in 2012 and last updated in 2019. OBJECTIVES: To determine if SSRIs are more effective than placebo or usual care at improving outcomes in people less than 12 months post-stroke, and to determine whether treatment with SSRIs is associated with adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 7 January 2021), Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL, Issue 7 of 12, 7 January 2021), MEDLINE (1946 to 7 January 2021), Embase (1974 to 7 January 2021), CINAHL (1982 to 7 January 2021), PsycINFO (1985 to 7 January 2021), and AMED (1985 to 7 January 2021). PsycBITE had previously been searched (16 July 2018). We searched clinical trials registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting stroke survivors within the first year. The intervention was any SSRI, at any dose, for any period, and for any indication. The comparator was usual care or placebo. Studies reporting at least one of our primary (disability score or independence) or secondary outcomes (impairments, depression, anxiety, quality of life, fatigue, cognition, healthcare cost, death, adverse events and leaving the study early) were included in the meta-analysis. The primary analysis included studies at low risk of bias. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on demographics, stroke type and, our pre-specified outcomes, and bias sources. Two review authors independently extracted data. We used mean difference (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous variables, and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous variables, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed bias risks and applied GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 76 eligible studies (13,029 participants); 75 provided data at end of treatment, and of these two provided data at follow-up. Thirty-eight required participants to have depression to enter. The duration, drug, and dose varied. Six studies were at low risk of bias across all domains; all six studies did not need participants to have depression to enter, and all used fluoxetine. Of these six studies, there was little to no difference in disability between groups SMD -0.0; 95% CI -0.05 to 0.05; 5 studies, 5436 participants, high-quality evidence) or in independence (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.03; 5 studies, 5926 participants; high-quality evidence) at the end of treatment. In the studies at low risk of bias across all domains, SSRIs slightly reduced the average depression score (SMD 0.14 lower, 95% CI 0.19 lower to 0.08 lower; 4 studies; 5356 participants, high-quality evidence) and there was a slight reduction in the proportion with depression (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.86; 3 studies, 5907 participants, high-quality evidence). Cognition was slightly better in the control group (MD -1.22, 95% CI -2.37 to -0.07; 4 studies, 5373 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Only one study (n = 30) reported neurological deficit score (SMD -0.39, 95% CI -1.12 to 0.33; low-quality evidence). SSRIs resulted in little to no difference in motor deficit (SMD 0.03, -0.02 to 0.08; 6 studies, 5518 participants, moderate-quality evidence). SSRIs slightly increased the proportion leaving the study early (RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.40; 6 studies, 6090 participants, high-quality evidence). SSRIs slightly increased the outcome of a seizure (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.98; 6 studies, 6080 participants, moderate-quality evidence) and a bone fracture (RR 2.35, 95% CI 1.62 to 3.41; 6 studies, 6080 participants, high-quality evidence). One study at low risk of bias across all domains reported gastrointestinal side effects (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.33, to 8.83; 1 study, 30 participants). There was no difference in the total number of deaths between SSRI and placebo (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.24; 6 studies, 6090 participants, moderate quality evidence). SSRIs probably result in little to no difference in fatigue (MD -0.06; 95% CI -1.24 to 1.11; 4 studies, 5524 participants, moderate-quality of evidence), nor in quality of life (MD 0.00; 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02, 3 studies, 5482 participants, high-quality evidence). When all studies, irrespective of risk of bias, were included, SSRIs reduced disability scores but not the proportion independent. There was insufficient data to perform a meta-analysis of outcomes at end of follow-up. Several small ongoing studies are unlikely to alter conclusions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is high-quality evidence that SSRIs do not make a difference to disability or independence after stroke compared to placebo or usual care, reduced the risk of future depression, increased bone fractures and probably increased seizure risk.

Soluble angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 is transiently elevated in COVID-19 and correlates with specific inflammatory and endothelial markers.

The main entry receptor of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). SARS-CoV-2 interactions with ACE2 may increase ectodomain shedding but consequences for the renin-angiotensin system and pathology in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain unclear. We measured soluble ACE2 (sACE2) and sACE levels by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in 114 hospital-treated COVID-19 patients compared with 10 healthy controls; follow-up samples after four months were analyzed for 58 patients. Associations between sACE2 respectively sACE and risk factors for severe COVID-19, outcome, and inflammatory markers were investigated. Levels of sACE2 were higher in COVID-19 patients than in healthy controls, median 5.0 (interquartile range 2.8-11.8) ng/ml versus 1.4 (1.1-1.6) ng/ml, p < .0001. sACE2 was higher in men than women but was not affected by other risk factors for severe COVID-19. sACE2 decreased to 2.3 (1.6-3.9) ng/ml at follow-up, p < .0001, but remained higher than in healthy controls, p = .012. sACE was marginally lower during COVID-19 compared with at follow-up, 57 (45-70) ng/ml versus 72 (52-87) ng/ml, p = .008. Levels of sACE2 and sACE did not differ depending on survival or disease severity. sACE2 during COVID-19 correlated with von Willebrand factor, factor VIII and D-dimer, while sACE correlated with interleukin 6, tumor necrosis factor α, and plasminogen activator inhibitor 1. Conclusions: sACE2 was transiently elevated in COVID-19, likely due to increased shedding from infected cells. sACE2 and sACE during COVID-19 differed in correlations with markers of inflammation and endothelial dysfunction, suggesting release from different cell types and/or vascular beds.

Prothrombotic changes in patients with COVID-19 are associated with disease severity and mortality.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at significant risk of thrombotic complications. However, their prothrombotic state is incompletely understood. Therefore, we measured in vivo activation markers of hemostasis, plasma levels of hemostatic proteins, and functional assays of coagulation and fibrinolysis in plasma from patients with COVID-19 and determined their association with disease severity and 30-day mortality. METHODS: We included 102 patients with COVID-19 receiving various levels of respiratory support admitted to general wards, intermediate units, or intensive care units and collected plasma samples shortly after hospital admission. RESULTS: Patients with COVID-19 with higher respiratory support had increased in vivo activation of coagulation and fibrinolysis, as reflected by higher plasma levels of d-dimer, thrombin-antithrombin, and plasmin-antiplasmin complexes as compared to patients with no to minimal respiratory support and healthy controls. Moreover, the patients with COVID-19 with higher respiratory support exhibited substantial ex vivo thrombin generation and lower ex vivo fibrinolytic capacity, despite higher doses of anticoagulant therapy compared to less severely ill patients. Fibrinogen, factor VIII, and von Willebrand factor levels increased, and ADAMTS13 levels decreased with increasing respiratory support in patients with COVID-19. Low platelet count; low levels of prothrombin, antithrombin, and ADAMTS13; and high levels of von Willebrand factor were associated with short-term mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Severe COVID-19 is associated with prothrombotic changes with increased in vivo activation of coagulation and fibrinolysis, despite anticoagulant therapy.

Stroke survivors' priorities for research related to life after stroke.

BACKGROUND: Stroke has transitioned from an untreatable, unpreventable disease to a highly treatable and preventable disease over recent decades, and the number of stroke survivors is expected to increase. The number is also foreseen to grow larger as a result of an aging population. With an escalating number of stroke survivors, research on how to improve life after stroke is needed. AIMS: The primary aim was to determine which area of research related to life after stroke that stroke patients and their informal carers prioritized as being relevant and valuable. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of all patients who had completed the 12 months of follow-up in the EFFECTS trial. In the questionnaire the stroke patients and their informal carers were asked to prioritize areas of research they considered important and valuable with respect to their life after stroke. RESULTS: Of the 731 patients who were still alive after the 12 months-follow-up, 589 responded. The most prioritized areas of research were Balance and walking difficulties (290 (49%) responders) and Post-stroke fatigue (173 (29%) responders). Women answered the undefined alternative "other" more often than men (43 women (11%) versus 11 men (6%), p = .04). Younger patients prioritized Post-stroke fatigue to a higher extent (88 (45%) versus (22%), p < .001), and elderly prioritized Balance and walking difficulties (214 (54%) versus 76 (40%), p = .002) and Speech difficulties (38 (10%) versus 9 (5%), p = .045). CONCLUSIONS: Life after stroke is perceived differentely with aging. Future research should address strategies to face challenges such as imbalance and walking difficulties and post-stroke-fatigue.

SARS-CoV-2 exposure, symptoms and seroprevalence in healthcare workers in Sweden.

SARS-CoV-2 may pose an occupational health risk to healthcare workers. Here, we report the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, self-reported symptoms and occupational exposure to SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare workers at a large acute care hospital in Sweden. The seroprevalence of IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was 19.1% among the 2149 healthcare workers recruited between April 14th and May 8th 2020, which was higher than the reported regional seroprevalence during the same time period. Symptoms associated with seroprevalence were anosmia (odds ratio (OR) 28.4, 95% CI 20.6-39.5) and ageusia (OR 19.2, 95% CI 14.3-26.1). Seroprevalence was also associated with patient contact (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.9-4.5) and covid-19 patient contact (OR 3.3, 95% CI 2.2-5.3). These findings imply an occupational risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers. Continued measures are warranted to assure healthcare workers safety and reduce transmission from healthcare workers to patients and to the community.

Fluoxetine for stroke recovery: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether fluoxetine, at any dose, given within the first year after stroke to patients who did not have to have mood disorders at randomization reduced disability, dependency, neurological deficits and fatigue; improved motor function, mood, and cognition at the end of treatment and follow-up, with the same number or fewer adverse effects. METHODS: Searches (from 2012) in July 2018 included databases, trials registers, reference lists, and contact with experts. Co-primary outcomes were dependence and disability. Dichotomous data were synthesized using risk ratios (RR) and continuous data using standardized mean differences (SMD). Quality was appraised using Cochrane risk of bias methods. Sensitivity analyses explored influence of study quality. RESULTS: The searches identified 3414 references of which 499 full texts were assessed for eligibility. Six new completed RCTs (n = 3710) were eligible, and were added to the seven trials identified in a 2012 Cochrane review (total: 13 trials, n = 4145). There was no difference in the proportion independent (3 trials, n = 3249, 36.6% fluoxetine vs. 36.7% control; RR 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.09, p = 0.99, I2 = 78%) nor in disability (7 trials n = 3404, SMD 0.05, -0.02 to 0.12 p = 0.15, I2 = 81%) at end of treatment. Fluoxetine was associated with better neurological scores and less depression. Among the four (n = 3283) high-quality RCTs, the only difference between groups was lower depression scores with fluoxetine. CONCLUSION: This class I evidence demonstrates that fluoxetine does not reduce disability and dependency after stroke but improves depression.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for stroke recovery.

BACKGROUND: Stroke is a major cause of adult disability. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have been used for many years to manage depression and other mood disorders after stroke. The 2012 Cochrane Review of SSRIs for stroke recovery demonstrated positive effects on recovery, even in people who were not depressed at randomisation. A large trial of fluoxetine for stroke recovery (fluoxetine versus placebo under supervision) has recently been published, and it is now appropriate to update the evidence. OBJECTIVES: To determine if SSRIs are more effective than placebo or usual care at improving outcomes in people less than 12 months post-stroke, and to determine whether treatment with SSRIs is associated with adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 16 July 2018), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL, Issue 7 of 12, July 2018), MEDLINE (1946 to July 2018), Embase (1974 to July 2018), CINAHL (1982 July 2018), PsycINFO (1985 to July 2018), AMED (1985 to July 2018), and PsycBITE March 2012 to July 2018). We also searched grey literature and clinical trials registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke survivors at any time within the first year. The intervention was any SSRI, given at any dose, for any period, and for any indication. We excluded drugs with mixed pharmacological effects. The comparator was usual care or placebo. To be included, trials had to collect data on at least one of our primary (disability score or independence) or secondary outcomes (impairments, depression, anxiety, quality of life, fatigue, healthcare cost, death, adverse events and leaving the trial early). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on demographics, type of stroke, time since stroke, our primary and secondary outcomes, and sources of bias. Two review authors independently extracted data from each trial. We used standardised mean differences (SMDs) to estimate treatment effects for continuous variables, and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous effects, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed risks of bias and applied GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We identified a total of 63 eligible trials recruiting 9168 participants, most of which provided data only at end of treatment and not at follow-up. There was a wide age range. About half the trials required participants to have depression to enter the trial. The duration, drug, and dose varied between trials. Only three of the included trials were at low risk of bias across the key 'Risk of bias' domains. A meta-analysis of these three trials found little or no effect of SSRI on either disability score: SMD -0.01 (95% CI -0.09 to 0.06; P = 0.75; 2 studies, 2829 participants; moderate-quality evidence) or independence: RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.09; P = 0.99; 3 studies, 3249 participants; moderate-quality evidence). We downgraded both these outcomes for imprecision. SSRIs reduced the average depression score (SMD 0.11 lower, 0.19 lower to 0.04 lower; 2 trials, 2861 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but there was a higher observed number of gastrointestinal side effects among participants treated with SSRIs compared to placebo (RR 2.19, 95% CI 1.00 to 4.76; P = 0.05; 2 studies, 148 participants; moderate-quality evidence), with no evidence of heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). For seizures there was no evidence of a substantial difference. When we included all trials in a sensitivity analysis, irrespective of risk of bias, SSRIs appeared to reduce disability scores but not dependence. One large trial (FOCUS) dominated the results. We identified several ongoing trials, including two large trials that together will recruit more than 3000 participants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no reliable evidence that SSRIs should be used routinely to promote recovery after stroke. Meta-analysis of the trials at low risk of bias indicate that SSRIs do not improve recovery from stroke. We identified potential improvements in disability only in the analyses which included trials at high risk of bias. A further meta-analysis of large ongoing trials will be required to determine the generalisability of these findings.

Long-term health-related quality of life, survival and costs by different levels of functional outcome six months after stroke.

INTRODUCTION: Information about the impact of functional outcome after stroke is currently missing on health-related quality of life, survival and costs. This information would be valuable for health economic evaluations and for allocation of resources in stroke health care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data on 297 Swedish patients included in the Third International Stroke Trial were analysed including functional outcome at six months (measured by Oxford Handicap Scale), health-related quality of life up to 18 months (EQ-5D-3L) and survival up to 36 months. We used record linkage to collect data on costs up to 36 months, using national patient registers. RESULTS: Patients with a better functional outcome level at six months had a significantly better health-related quality of life at 18 months (p < 0.05), better long-term survival (p < 0.05) and lower costs (p < 0.001), for all time points up to 36 months. The difference in costs was mainly due to differences in days spent in hospital (p < 0.005). DISCUSSION: This study showed an association between functional outcome at six months and health-related quality of life up to 18 months, and costs up to 36 months. CONCLUSION: Functional outcome six months after stroke is an important determinant of health-related quality of life, survival and costs over 36 months. Effective interventions aimed at reducing short-term disability levels are therefore also expected to reduce the overall burden of stroke.

The FOCUS, AFFINITY and EFFECTS trials studying the effect(s) of fluoxetine in patients with a recent stroke: statistical and health economic analysis plan for the trials and for the individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Small trials have suggested that fluoxetine may improve neurological recovery from stroke. FOCUS, AFFINITY and EFFECTS are a family of investigator-led, multicentre, parallel group, randomised, placebo-controlled trials which aim to determine whether the routine administration of fluoxetine (20 mg daily) for six months after an acute stroke improves patients' functional outcome. METHODS/DESIGN: The core protocol for the three trials has been published (Mead et al., Trials 20:369, 2015). The trials include patients aged 18 years and older with a clinical diagnosis of stroke and persisting focal neurological deficits at randomisation 2-15 days after stroke onset. Patients are randomised centrally via each trials' web-based randomisation system using a common minimisation algorithm. Patients are allocated fluoxetine 20 mg once daily or matching placebo capsules for six months. The primary outcome measure is the modified Rankin scale (mRS) at six months. Secondary outcomes include: living circumstances; the Stroke Impact Scale; EuroQol (EQ5D-5 L); the vitality subscale of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF36); diagnosis of depression; adherence to medication; serious adverse events including death and recurrent stroke; and resource use at six and 12 months and the mRS at 12 months. DISCUSSION: Minor variations have been tailored to the national setting in the UK (FOCUS), Australia, New Zealand and Vietnam (AFFINITY) and Sweden (EFFECTS). Each trial is run and funded independently and will report its own results. A prospectively planned individual patient data meta-analysis of all three trials will provide the most precise estimate of the overall effect and establish whether any effects differ between trials or subgroups. This statistical analysis plan describes the core analyses for all three trials and that for the individual patient data meta-analysis. Recruitment and follow-up in the FOCUS trial is expected to be completed by the end of 2018. AFFINITY and EFFECTS are likely to complete follow-up in 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: FOCUS: ISRCTN , ISRCTN83290762 . Registered on 23 May 2012. EudraCT, 2011-005616-29. Registered on 3 February 2012. AFFINITY: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12611000774921 . Registered on 22 July 2011. EFFECTS: ISRCTN , ISRCTN13020412 . Registered on 19 December 2014. Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02683213 . Registered on 2 February 2016. EudraCT, 2011-006130-16 . Registered on 8 August 2014.

Effects of alteplase on survival after ischaemic stroke (IST-3): 3 year follow-up of a randomised, controlled, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: The effect of alteplase on patient survival after ischaemic stroke is the subject of debate. We report the effect of intravenous alteplase on long-term survival after ischaemic stroke of participants in the Third International Stroke Trial (IST-3). METHODS: In IST-3, done at 156 hospitals in 12 countries (Australia, Europe, and the UK), participants (aged >18 years) were randomly assigned with a telephone voice-activated or web-based system in a 1:1 ratio to treatment with intravenous 0·9 mg/kg alteplase plus standard care or standard care alone within 6 h of ischaemic stroke. We followed up participants in the UK and Scandinavia (Sweden and Norway) for survival up to 3 years after randomisation using data from national registries and compared survival in the two groups with proportional hazards survival analysis, adjusting for key prognostic variables. IST-3 is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN25765518. FINDINGS: Between May 5, 2000, and July 27, 2011, 3035 participants were enrolled in IST-3. Of these, 1948 (64%) of 3035 participants were scheduled for analysis of 3 year survival, and 1946 (>99%) of these were included in the analysis (967 [50%] in the alteplase plus standard care group and 979 [50%] in the standard care alone group). By 3 years after randomisation, 453 (47%) of 967 participants in the alteplase plus standard care group and 494 (50%) of 979 in the standard care alone group had died (risk difference 3·6% [95% CI -0·8 to 8·1]). Participants allocated to alteplase had a significantly higher hazard of death during the first 7 days (99 [10%] of 967 died in the alteplase plus standard care group vs 65 [7%] of 979 in the standard care alone group; hazard ratio 1·52 [95% CI 1·11-2·08]; p=0·004) and a significantly lower hazard of death between 8 days and 3 years (354 [41%] of 868 vs 429 [47%] of 914; 0·78 [0·68-0·90]; p=0·007). INTERPRETATION: Alteplase treatment within 6 h after ischaemic stroke was associated with a small, non-significant reduction in risk of death at 3 years, but among individuals who survived the acute phase, treatment was associated with a significant increase in long-term survival. These results are reassuring for clinicians who have expressed concerns about the effect of alteplase on survival. FUNDING: Heart and Stroke Scotland, UK Medical Research Council, Health Foundation UK, Stroke Association UK, Research Council of Norway, AFA Insurance, Swedish Heart Lung Fund, Foundation of Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg, Polish Ministry of Science and Education, Australian Heart Foundation, Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Swiss National Research Foundation, Swiss Heart Foundation, Assessorato alla Sanita (Regione dell'Umbria), and Danube University.

Elevated Troponin Levels in Acute Stroke Patients Predict Long-term Mortality.

BACKGROUND: Elevated plasma levels of troponin in acute stroke patients are common and have in several studies been shown to predict in-hospital and short-term mortality. Little is, however, known about the long-term prognosis of these patients. The aim of this study was to determine patient characteristics and 5-year mortality in patients with acute stroke and troponin elevation on admission. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients with acute stroke and a plasma troponin I (TnI) analyzed on admission to Danderyd Hospital between January 1, 2005, and January 1, 2006 (n = 247). Patient characteristics were obtained from the Swedish National Stroke Register, Riksstroke, as well as hospital records. Mortality data were obtained from the Swedish Cause of Death Register. RESULTS: There were 133 patients (54%) with TnI less than .03 µg/L (normal), 74 patients (30%) with TnI .03-.11 µg/L (low elevation), and 40 patients (16%) with TnI greater than .11 µg/L (high elevation). TnI elevations were associated with a higher age, prior ischemic stroke, chronic heart failure, renal insufficiency, stroke severity, and ST segment elevation or depression on admission. The rate of hyperlipidemia decreased with increasing TnI. Adjusted for age and comorbidity, elevated TnI values on admission had a significantly and sustained increased mortality over the 5-year follow-up, with a hazard ratio of 1.90 (95% confidence interval, 1.33-2.70). CONCLUSIONS: Troponin elevation in patients with acute stroke, even when adjusted for several possible confounders, is associated with an almost 2-fold increased risk of 5-year mortality.