Workflows and Outcomes in Patients With Suspected Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke Triaged in Urban and Nonurban Areas.

BACKGROUND: We aim to compare the outcome of patients from urban areas, where the referral center is able to perform thrombectomy, with patients from nonurban areas enrolled in the RACECAT trial (Direct Transfer to an Endovascular Center Compared to Transfer to the Closest Stroke Center in Acute Stroke Patients With Suspected Large Vessel Occlusion). METHODS: Patients with suspected large vessel occlusion stroke, as evaluated by a Rapid Arterial Occlusion Evaluation score of ≥5, from urban catchment areas of thrombectomy-capable centers during RACECAT trial enrollment period were included in the Stroke Code Registry of Catalonia. Primary outcome was disability at 90 days, as assessed by the shift analysis on the modified Rankin Scale score, in patients with an ischemic stroke. Secondary outcomes included mortality at 90 days, rate of thrombolysis and thrombectomy, time from onset to thrombolysis, and thrombectomy initiation. Propensity score matching was used to assemble a cohort of patients with similar characteristics. RESULTS: The analysis included 1369 patients from nonurban areas and 2502 patients from urban areas. We matched 920 patients with an ischemic stroke from urban areas and nonurban areas based on their propensity scores. Patients with ischemic stroke from nonurban areas had higher degrees of disability at 90 days (median [interquartle range] modified Rankin Scale score, 3 [2-5] versus 3 [1-5], common odds ratio, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.06-1.48]); the observed average effect was only significant in patients with large vessel stroke (common odds ratio, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.08-1.65]). Mortality rate was similar between groups(odds ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.81-1.28]). Patients from nonurban areas had higher odds of receiving thrombolysis (odds ratio, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.16-1.67]), lower odds of receiving thrombectomy(odds ratio, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.51-0.75]), and longer time from stroke onset to thrombolysis (mean difference 38 minutes [95% CI, 25-52]) and thrombectomy(mean difference 66 minutes [95% CI, 37-95]). CONCLUSIONS: In Catalonia, Spain, patients with large vessel occlusion stroke triaged in nonurban areas had worse neurological outcomes than patients from urban areas, where the referral center was able to perform thrombectomy. Interventions aimed at improving organizational practices and the development of thrombectomy capabilities in centers located in remote areas should be pursued. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02795962.

Impact of COVID-19 Infection on the Outcome of Patients With Ischemic Stroke.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We evaluated whether stroke severity, functional outcome, and mortality are different in patients with ischemic stroke with or without coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. METHODS: A prospective, observational, multicentre cohort study in Catalonia, Spain. Recruitment was consecutive from mid-March to mid-May 2020. Patients had an acute ischemic stroke within 48 hours and a previous modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0 to 3. We collected demographic data, vascular risk factors, prior mRS score, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, rate of reperfusion therapies, logistics, and metrics. Primary end point was functional outcome at 3 months. Favourable outcome was defined depending on the previous mRS score. Secondary outcome was mortality at 3 months. We performed mRS shift and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: We evaluated 701 patients (mean age 72.3±13.3 years, 60.5% men) and 91 (13%) had COVID-19 infection. Median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was higher in patients with COVID-19 compared with patients without COVID-19 (8 [3-18] versus 6 [2-14], P=0.049). Proportion of patients with a favourable functional outcome was 33.7% in the COVID-19 and 47% in the non-COVID-19 group. However, after a multivariable logistic regression analysis, COVID-19 infection did not increase the probability of unfavourable functional outcome. Mortality rate was 39.3% among patients with COVID-19 and 16.1% in the non-COVID-19 group. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, COVID-19 infection was a risk factor for mortality (hazard ratio, 3.14 [95% CI, 2.10-4.71]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ischemic stroke and COVID-19 infection have more severe strokes and a higher mortality than patients with stroke without COVID-19 infection. However, functional outcome is comparable in both groups.

MONOZEB: Long-term observational study of eslicarbazepine acetate monotherapy.

AIM: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) when used as monotherapy for 1 year or more in routine clinical use in patients with focal seizures in epilepsy clinics in Spain. METHODS: This is a retrospective, observational, noninterventional study. Eligible patients were aged ≥18 years, had focal seizures, and started on ESL ≥1 year before database closure. Primary endpoint was the following: proportion seizure-free for ≥6 months at 1 and 2 years. Secondary endpoints included retention on ESL monotherapy at 1 and 2 years, seizure frequency change, seizure worsening, and side effects. Other analyses included seizure freedom from baseline to 1 and 2 years and outcomes in special populations. RESULTS: Four hundred thirty-five patients were included (127 on first-line monotherapy and 308 converting to ESL monotherapy): median daily dose was 800 mg at all time points; 63.2% were seizure-free at 1 year, 65.1% at 2 years, and 50.3% for the entire follow-up. Mean duration of ESL monotherapy was 66.7 months; retention was 88.0% at 1 year and 81.9% at 2 years. Mean reduction in seizure frequency was 75.5% at last visit. Over the entire follow-up, seizure worsening was seen in 22 patients (5.1%), side effects in 28.0%, considered severe in 1.8%, and leading to discontinuation in 5.7%. Dizziness, hyponatremia (sodium <135 mEq/l), and somnolence were the most frequent side effects. Outcomes in special populations (patients aged ≥65 years and those with psychiatric history or learning difficulty) were consistent with the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with focal seizures taking ESL monotherapy had excellent retention, high seizure-free rates, and good tolerability up to 2 years.

Efficacy and tolerability of perampanel as a first add-on therapy with different anti-seizure drugs.

PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of perampanel (PER) when administered as a first add-on therapy to patients with focal epilepsy or idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE) taking one other antiseizure drug (ASD). METHODS: This multicentre, retrospective, one-year observational study collected data from patients (≥12 years) who initiated treatment with PER as first add-on therapy. Patients had to be experiencing inadequate seizure control on ASD monotherapy and tried ≤3 ASD monotherapies before initiating PER. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed, adjusted for the number and type of previous seizures, duration and aetiology of epilepsy. RESULTS: Of the 149 patients included in the study (mean age 41 years; 54.4 % male), 118 (79.2 %) were still receiving PER as first add-on treatment after 12 months. Mean PER dose was 6.2 mg/day. At 12 months, 45.6 % were seizure-free and 84.6 % responders. A significant difference in seizure freedom rate was found between patients with IGE and patients with focal epilepsy, but not in responders. Reduced seizure control was observed when PER was administered with strong enzyme-inducing ASDs; conversely, increased seizure control was seen when the same dose of PER was combined with enzyme-inhibiting ASDs. The most frequent adverse events were dizziness (15.4 %), irritability (14.1 %) and drowsiness (14.1 %); no differences in tolerance were observed among different combinations. CONCLUSION: PER demonstrated a good efficacy and safety profile when used as a first add-on therapy in patients who did not respond to monotherapy. PER dose adjustments may optimize seizure control when combined with strong enzyme-inducing or enzyme-inhibiting ASDs.