Micro-Embolic Signals and Dissection: Association or Causation for Stroke? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Although the mechanism of stroke in cervical artery dissection (CAD) has been hypothesized to be embolization rather than hemodynamic compromise, there are a limited number of studies supporting this hypothesis. Detection of micro-embolic signals (MESs) using transcranial Doppler (TCD) helps in understanding the mechanism in these patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to estimate the prevalence of MES and its association with stroke outcomes in patients with acute stroke/TIA secondary to dissection. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted for studies before January 26, 2021, in PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies were identified that used TCD to detect MES in stroke/TIA patients secondary to CAD. Pooled prevalence was calculated. Entire statistical analysis was conducted in R version 3.6.2. RESULTS: Eleven studies involving 112 patients (50 MES+, 62 MES-) were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of MES among acute stroke/TIA patients secondary to dissection was 46.0% (95% CI 26.0-67.0%). The presence of MES was associated with an increased risk of early ischemic recurrence in patients with CAD. We could not estimate the functional outcome and mortality associated with the presence of MES due to the scarcity of data. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis showed 46% prevalence of MES in the studies which looked at acute stroke/TIA secondary to CAD using TCD. This finding supports the assumption that embolism may be a major cause of stroke in patients with dissection although this could be determined only in a small population.

Bridging the gap between statistical significance and clinical relevance: A systematic review of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds of scales reported in movement disorders research.

Background: Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is the smallest change in an outcome measure that is considered clinically meaningful. Using validated MCID thresholds for outcomes powers trials adequately to detect meaningful treatment effects, aids in their interpretation and guides development of new outcome measures. Objectives: To provide a comprehensive summary of MCID thresholds of various symptom severity scales reported in movement disorder. Methods: We conducted systematic review of the literature and included studies of one or more movement disorders, and reporting MCID scales. Results: 2763 reports were screened. Final review included 32 studies. Risk of bias (RoB) assessment showed most studies were of good quality. Most commonly evaluated scale was Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) (11 out of 32). Four studies assessing MDS-UPDRS had assessed its different sub-parts, reporting a change of 2.64,3.05,3.25 and 0.9 points to detect clinically meaningful improvement and 2.45,2.51,4.63 and 0.8 points to detect clinically meaningful worsening, for the Part I, II, III and IV, respectively. For Parts II + III, I + II + III and I + II + III + IV, MCID thresholds reported for clinically meaningful improvement were 5.73, 4.9, 6.7 and 7.1 points respectively; while those for clinically meaningful worsening were 4.7, 4.2, 5.2 and 6.3 points, respectively. MCID thresholds reported for other scales included Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS), Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSRS), and Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Scale (BFMD). Conclusion: This review summarizes all the MCID thresholds currently reported in Movement disorders research and provides a comprehensive resource for future trials, highlighting the need for standardized and validated MCID scales in movement disorder research.

Minimal Clinically Important Difference of Scales Reported in Stroke Trials: A Review.

There is a growing awareness of the significance of using minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) in stroke research. An MCID is the smallest change in an outcome measure that is considered clinically meaningful. This review is the first to provide a comprehensive summary of various scales and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in stroke research and their MCID values reported in the literature, including a concise overview of the concept of and methods for determining MCIDs in stroke research. Despite the controversies and limitations surrounding the estimation of MCIDs, their importance in modern clinical trials cannot be overstated. Anchor-based and distribution-based methods are recommended for estimating MCIDs, with patient self-evaluation being a crucial component in capturing the patient's perspective on their health. A combination of methods can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the clinical relevance of treatment effects, and incorporating the patient's perspective can enhance the care of stroke patients.

Antinuclear antibodies in neurology and their clinical application.

Antinuclear antibodies (ANA) are a diverse group of autoantibodies found in various systemic autoimmune disorders. They represent a key diagnostic marker in the diagnosis of connective tissue disorders (CTD). Although many techniques exist, ANA by indirect immunofluorescence remains the gold standard for diagnosing CTDs. Neurologists should be aware of the type of assay used for detection and the advantages and disadvantages of using each method. Through this article, we aimed to review the methodological aspects of the detection of ANA and its subtypes and their clinical relevance in various neurologic disorders.

Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Neurological Conditions: Review of Concept and Methods.

The concept of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) emerged from the recognition that statistical significance alone is not enough to determine the clinical relevance of treatment effects in clinical research. In many cases, statistically significant changes in outcomes may not be meaningful to patients or may not result in any tangible improvements in their health. This has led to a growing emphasis on the importance of measuring patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical trials and other research studies, in order to capture the patient perspective on treatment effectiveness. MCID is defined as the smallest change in scores that is considered meaningful or important to patients. MCID is particularly important in fields such as neurology, where many of the outcomes of interest are subjective or based on patient-reported symptoms. This review discusses the challenges associated with interpreting outcomes of clinical trials based solely on statistical significance, highlighting the importance of considering clinical relevance and patient perception of change. There are two main approaches to estimating MCID: anchor-based and distribution-based. Anchor-based approaches compare change scores using an external anchor, while distribution-based approaches estimate MCID values based on statistical characteristics of scores within a sample. MCID is dynamic and context-specific, and there is no single 'gold standard' method for estimating it. A range of MCID thresholds should be defined using multiple methods for a disease under targeted intervention, rather than relying on a single absolute value. The use of MCID thresholds can be an important tool for researchers, neurophysicians and patients in evaluating the effectiveness of treatments and interventions, and in making informed decisions about care.

Comparison of Disease Profiles and Three-Month Outcomes of Patients with Neurological Disorders with and without COVID-19: An Ambispective Cohort Study.

Objective: Neurological emergencies saw a paradigm shift in approach during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with the challenge to manage patients with and without COVID-19. We aimed to compare the various neurological disorders and 3 months outcome in patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: In an ambispective cohort study design, we enrolled patients with and without SARS CoV-2 infection coming to a medical emergency with neurological disorders between April 2020 and September 2020. Demographic, clinical, biochemical, and treatment details of these patients were collected and compared. Their outcomes, both in-hospital and at 3 months were assessed by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Results: Two thirty-five patients (235) were enrolled from emergency services with neurological disorders. Of them, 81 (34.5%) were COVID-19 positive. The mean (SD) age was 49.5 (17.3) years, and the majority of the patients were male (63.0%). The commonest neurological diagnosis was acute ischemic stroke (AIS) (43.0%). The in-hospital mortality was higher in the patients who were COVID-19 positive (COVID-19 positive: 29 (35.8%) versus COVID-19 negative: 12 (7.8%), P value: <0.001). The 3 months telephonic follow-up could be completed in 73.2% of the patients (142/194). Four (12.1%) deaths occurred on follow-up in the COVID-19 positive versus fifteen (13.8%) in the COVID-19 negative patients (P value: 1.00). The 3-month mRS was worse in the COVID-19 positive group (P value <0.001). However, this was driven by higher in-hospital morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 positive patients. Conclusion: Patients with neurological disorders presenting with COVID-19 infection had worse outcomes, including in-hospital and 3 months disability.

Patients with Neurological Illnesses and Their Experience During the Lockdown: A Teleinterview-based Study.

Background: Governments have imposed lockdowns in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospitals have restricted outpatient clinics and elective services meant for non-COVID illnesses. This has led to patients facing unprecedented challenges and uncertainties. This study was carried out to assess patients' concerns and apprehensions about the effect of the lockdown on their treatments. Materials and Methods: An ambispective, observational cross-sectional single centre study was conducted. Patients were contacted telephonically and requested to answer a structured questionnaire. Their responses were documented and summarized as frequency and proportions. Results: A total of 727 patients were interviewed. Epilepsy (32%) was the most common neurological illness in our cohort followed by stroke (18%). About half the patients and/or their caregivers reported health-related concerns during the lockdown. The primary concern was how to connect with their treating neurologist if need arose. Forty-seven patients (6.4%) had drug default. Among patients on immunomodulatory treatments, only eight patients had drug default. High compliance rates were also observed in the stroke and epilepsy cohorts. Of the 71 patients who required emergency care during the lockdown, 24 could reach our hospital emergency. Fourteen patients either had a delay or could not seek emergency care. Two-thirds of our patients found the telemedicine experience satisfactory. Conclusion: The ongoing pandemic will continue to pose challenges to both physicians and patients. Patients in follow-up may need to be contacted regularly and counselled regarding the importance of maintaining drug compliance. Telemedicine can be used to strengthen the healthcare delivery to patients with non-COVID illnesses.

Predisposing Factors and Management of Hemodynamic Depression Following Carotid Artery Stenting.

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) involves dilatation of carotid bulb which can trigger a series of neuronal responses resulting in hemodynamic depression that might influence the outcome of the procedure. This is a frequent but underdiagnosed complication of CAS. Although it is mild, transient and self-limiting in majority of cases, it can result in significant morbidity and mortality if persistent. Neurologists should be aware of the predisposing factors and management of this common complication. In patients who present with stroke following carotid stenting, neurologists should be aware of hypoperfusion secondary to hemodynamic depression as a cause of stroke apart from the stent thrombosis and occlusion.

Micro-embolic signal monitoring in stroke subtypes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 58 studies.

Introduction: Micro-embolic signals (MESs) detected using transcranial Doppler (TCD) help in risk stratification in stroke patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to estimate the prevalence of MES and its association with stroke recurrence, functional outcome, and mortality in different stroke subtypes. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted before 26th January 2021 in PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies were identified that used TCD to detect MES in stroke/TIA patients. Pooled prevalence and odds ratio (OR) along with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated for different outcome measures. The entire statistical analysis was conducted in R version 3.6.2. Findings: Fifty-eight studies involving 5123 patients (1329 MES+, 3794 MES-) were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of MES among all acute stroke/TIA patients was 30% (95% CI 25-34%). The pooled prevalence adjusted after the trim-and-fill analysis among all acute stroke/TIA patients was 18% (95% CI 14-23%). The prevalence of MES was high among all stroke subtypes except in patients with small vessel disease (SVD). In patients with new-onset stroke/TIA, the presence of MES was associated with a high risk of recurrence of cerebral ischemia (OR 4.03; 95% CI 2.38-6.82). Although no significant association was observed for the presence of MES with increased mortality (OR 2.37; 95% CI 0.75-7.50) and poor functional outcome (OR 2.11; 95% CI 0.20-22.50) among patients with new-onset stroke/TIA, this could only be determined in a smaller sample size of 477 patients. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis showed a 30% prevalence of MES following acute stroke/TIA. The presence of MES increased the chance of recurrence of cerebral ischemia but was not associated with poor functional outcomes and mortality in the studied subgroup.