The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 provides a rules-based synthesis of the available evidence on levels and trends in health outcomes, a diverse set of risk factors, and health system responses. GBD 2019 covered 204 countries and territories, as well as first administrative level disaggregations for 22 countries, from 1990 to 2019. Because GBD is highly standardised and comprehensive, spanning both fatal and non-fatal outcomes, and uses a mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive list of hierarchical disease and injury causes, the study provides a powerful basis for detailed and broad insights on global health trends and emerging challenges. GBD 2019 incorporates data from 281 586 sources and provides more than 3•5 billion estimates of health outcome and health system measures of interest for global, national, and subnational policy dialogue. All GBD estimates are publicly available and adhere to the Guidelines on Accurate and Transparent Health Estimate Reporting. From this vast amount of information, five key insights that are important for health, social, and economic development strategies have been distilled. These insights are subject to the many limitations outlined in each of the component GBD capstone papers.

Background There is an increased attention to stroke following SARS-CoV-2. The goal of this study was to better depict the short-term risk of stroke and its associated factors among SARS-CoV-2 hospitalized patients. Methods This multicentre, multinational observational study includes hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 patients from North and South America (United States, Canada, and Brazil), Europe (Greece, Italy, Finland, and Turkey), Asia (Lebanon, Iran, and India), and Oceania (New Zealand). The outcome was the risk of subsequent stroke. Centres were included by non-probability sampling. The counts and clinical characteristics including laboratory findings and imaging of the patients with and without a subsequent stroke were recorded according to a predefined protocol. Quality, risk of bias, and heterogeneity assessments were conducted according to ROBINS-E and Cochrane Q-test. The risk of subsequent stroke was estimated through meta-analyses with random effect models. Bivariate logistic regression was used to determine the parameters with predictive outcome value. The study was reported according to the STROBE, MOOSE, and EQUATOR guidelines. Findings We received data from 26,175 hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 patients from 99 tertiary centres in 65 regions of 11 countries until May 1st, 2020. A total of 17,799 patients were included in meta-analyses. Among them, 156(0.9%) patients had a stroke—123(79%) ischaemic stroke, 27(17%) intracerebral/subarachnoid hemorrhage, and 6(4%) cerebral sinus thrombosis. Subsequent stroke risks calculated with meta-analyses, under low to moderate heterogeneity, were 0.5% among all centres in all countries, and 0.7% among countries with higher health expenditures. The need for mechanical ventilation (OR: 1.9, 95% CI:1.1–3.5, p = 0.03) and the presence of ischaemic heart disease (OR: 2.5, 95% CI:1.4–4.7, p = 0.006) were predictive of stroke. Interpretation The results of this multi-national study on hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection indicated an overall stroke risk of 0.5%(pooled risk: 0.9%). The need for mechanical ventilation and the history of ischaemic heart disease are the independent predictors of stroke among SARS-CoV-2 patients. Funding None.

Background and Purpose: In ischemic stroke, intravenous tenecteplase is noninferior to alteplase in selected patients and has some practical advantages. Several stroke centers in New Zealand changed to routine off-label intravenous tenecteplase due to improved early recanalization in large vessel occlusion, inconsistent access to thrombectomy within stroke networks, and for consistency in treatment protocols between patients with and without large vessel occlusion. We report the feasibility and safety outcomes in tenecteplase-treated patients. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients thrombolyzed with intravenous tenecteplase at 1 comprehensive and 2 regional stroke centers from July 14, 2018, to February 29, 2020. We report the baseline clinical characteristics, rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and angioedema. These were then compared with patient outcomes with those treated with intravenous alteplase at 2 other comprehensive stroke centers. Multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression models were performed assessing the association of tenecteplase with symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and independent outcome (modified Rankin Scale score, 0–2) at day 90. Results: There were 165 patients treated with tenecteplase and 254 with alteplase. Age (75 versus 74 years), sex (56% versus 60% male), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores (8 versus 10), median door-to-needle times (47 versus 48 minutes), or onset-to-needle time (129 versus 130 minutes) were similar between the groups. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 3 (1.8% [95% CI, 0.4–5.3]) tenecteplase patients compared with 7 (2.7% [95% CI, 1.1–5.7]) alteplase patients ( P =0.75). There were no differences between tenecteplase and alteplase in the rates of angioedema (4 [2.4%; 95% CI, 0.7–6.2] versus 1 [0.4%; 95% CI, 0.01–2.2], P =0.08) or 90-day functional independence (100 [61%] versus 140 [57%], P =0.47), respectively. In mixed-effects logistic regression models, there was no significant association between thrombolytic choice and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (odds ratio tenecteplase, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.14–2.80], P =0.53) or functional independence (odds ratio tenecteplase, 1.20 [95% CI, 0.74–1.95], P =0.46). Conclusions: Routine use of tenecteplase for stroke thrombolysis was feasible and had comparable safety profile and outcome to alteplase.

ImportanceInternational guidelines recommend avoiding intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in patients with ischemic stroke who have a recent intake of a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC).ObjectiveTo determine the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) associated with use of IVT in patients with recent DOAC ingestion.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study included 64 primary and comprehensive stroke centers across Europe, Asia, Australia, and New Zealand. Consecutive adult patients with ischemic stroke who received IVT (both with and without thrombectomy) were included. Patients whose last known DOAC ingestion was more than 48 hours before stroke onset were excluded. A total of 832 patients with recent DOAC use were compared with 32 375 controls without recent DOAC use. Data were collected from January 2008 to December 2021.ExposuresPrior DOAC therapy (confirmed last ingestion within 48 hours prior to IVT) compared with no prior oral anticoagulation.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe main outcome was sICH within 36 hours after IVT, defined as worsening of at least 4 points on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and attributed to radiologically evident intracranial hemorrhage. Outcomes were compared according to different selection strategies (DOAC-level measurements, DOAC reversal treatment, IVT with neither DOAC-level measurement nor idarucizumab). The association of sICH with DOAC plasma levels and very recent ingestions was explored in sensitivity analyses.ResultsOf 33 207 included patients, 14 458 (43.5%) were female, and the median (IQR) age was 73 (62-80) years. The median (IQR) National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 9 (5-16). Of the 832 patients taking DOAC, 252 (30.3%) received DOAC reversal before IVT (all idarucizumab), 225 (27.0%) had DOAC-level measurements, and 355 (42.7%) received IVT without measuring DOAC plasma levels or reversal treatment. The unadjusted rate of sICH was 2.5% (95% CI, 1.6-3.8) in patients taking DOACs compared with 4.1% (95% CI, 3.9-4.4) in control patients using no anticoagulants. Recent DOAC ingestion was associated with lower odds of sICH after IVT compared with no anticoagulation (adjusted odds ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.36-0.92). This finding was consistent among the different selection strategies and in sensitivity analyses of patients with detectable plasma levels or very recent ingestion.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, there was insufficient evidence of excess harm associated with off-label IVT in selected patients after ischemic stroke with recent DOAC ingestion.