Background and Purpose: The efficiency of prehospital care chain response and the adequacy of hospital resources are challenged amid the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, with suspected consequences for patients with ischemic stroke eligible for mechanical thrombectomy (MT). Methods: We conducted a prospective national-level data collection of patients treated with MT, ranging 45 days across epidemic containment measures instatement, and of patients treated during the same calendar period in 2019. The primary end point was the variation of patients receiving MT during the epidemic period. Secondary end points included care delays between onset, imaging, and groin puncture. To analyze the primary end point, we used a Poisson regression model. We then analyzed the correlation between the number of MTs and the number of COVID-19 cases hospitalizations, using the Pearson correlation coefficient (compared with the null value). Results: A total of 1513 patients were included at 32 centers, in all French administrative regions. There was a 21% significant decrease (0.79; [95%CI, 0.76–0.82]; P <0.001) in MT case volumes during the epidemic period, and a significant increase in delays between imaging and groin puncture, overall (mean 144.9±SD 86.8 minutes versus 126.2±70.9; P <0.001 in 2019) and in transferred patients (mean 182.6±SD 82.0 minutes versus 153.25±67; P <0.001). After the instatement of strict epidemic mitigation measures, there was a significant negative correlation between the number of hospitalizations for COVID and the number of MT cases ( R 2 −0.51; P =0.04). Patients treated during the COVID outbreak were less likely to receive intravenous thrombolysis and to have unwitnessed strokes (both P <0.05). Conclusions: Our study showed a significant decrease in patients treated with MTs during the first stages of the COVID epidemic in France and alarming indicators of lengthened care delays. These findings prompt immediate consideration of local and regional stroke networks preparedness in the varying contexts of COVID-19 pandemic evolution.

BackgroundStudies have suggested that collateral status modifies the effect of successful reperfusion on functional outcome after endovascular therapy (EVT). We aimed to assess the association between collateral status and EVT outcomes and to investigate whether collateral status modified the effect of successful reperfusion on EVT outcomes.MethodsWe used data from the ongoing, prospective, multicenter Endovascular Treatment in Ischemic Stroke (ETIS) Registry. Collaterals were graded according to the American Society of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology/Society of Interventional Radiology (ASITN/SIR) guidelines. Patients were divided into two groups based on angiographic collateral status: poor (grade 0–2) versus good (grade 3–4) collaterals.ResultsAmong 2020 patients included in the study, 959 (47%) had good collaterals. Good collaterals were associated with favorable outcome (90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0–2) (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.88). Probability of good outcome decreased with increased time from onset to reperfusion in both good and poor collateral groups. Successful reperfusion was associated with higher odds of favorable outcome in good collaterals (OR 6.01, 95% CI 3.27 to 11.04) and poor collaterals (OR 5.65, 95% CI 3.32 to 9.63) with no significant interaction. Similarly, successful reperfusion was associated with higher odds of excellent outcome (90-day mRS 0–1) and lower odds of mortality in both groups with no significant interaction. The benefit of successful reperfusion decreased with time from onset in both groups, but the curve was steeper in the poor collateral group.ConclusionsCollateral status predicted functional outcome after EVT. However, collateral status on the pretreatment angiogram did not decrease the clinical benefit of successful reperfusion.

BACKGROUND Two recent trials demonstrated a benefit for endovascular therapy (EVT) in the treatment of basilar artery occlusion (BAO). In light of the expected increase in the use of EVT for BAO, we sought to understand the technique preferences of neurointerventionalists performing EVT for BAO. METHODS We conducted an international online survey of physician opinions on the use of EVT in BAO between January and March 2022. The survey was distributed through stroke and neurointerventional organizations. Survey questions examined selection of patients for the procedure and the techniques currently used for EVT in BAO. Responses from neurointerventionalists were analyzed. RESULTS More than 3000 participants were invited yielding 1245 respondents, of whom 543 were classified as neurointerventionalists across 52 countries and included in this analysis. Most neurointerventionalists would proceed to EVT for occlusions of the V4 segment, the basilar artery, or the posterior cerebral artery, without regard for prior intravenous thrombolysis. For BAO of embolic etiology, aspiration only thrombectomy was the preferred method of 50.3% of neurointerventionalists. For BAO of intracranial atherosclerotic disease etiology, combined stent retriever and aspiration thrombectomy was the preferred method of 40.5% of neurointerventionalists. The majority of neurointerventionalists (88.0%) would proceed to stenting after 3 or fewer failed passes for patients with BAO of intracranial atherosclerotic disease etiology. In patients undergoing stenting, aspirin and clopidogrel was the most common antiplatelet regime (52.4%). CONCLUSIONS Among the surveyed neurointerventionalists, the most common techniques for EVT of patients with BAO were contact aspiration or combined stent retriever with aspiration thrombectomy. For patients with BAO due to intracranial atherosclerotic disease, the majority of neurointerventionalists were willing to stent and do so most often after 3 or fewer failed passes and with the use of dual antiplatelet medications. Further study is needed to determine the optimal technique for EVT of BAO with or without intracranial atherosclerotic disease. Key Words

BackgroundPatients treated with acute carotid stenting (CAS) may have higher odds of a favorable outcome than those treated without CAS during thrombectomy in tandem occlusions. Antiplatelet therapy is associated with CAS to avoid stent thrombosis, which occurs in around 20% of patients and negatively impacts outcomes. In this study we compared two antiplatelet strategies in tandem occlusion strokes treated with CAS and intracranial thrombectomy in clinical practice.MethodsThe Endovascular Treatment in Ischemic Stroke Registry is an ongoing prospective observational study involving 21 comprehensive stroke centers performing thrombectomy in France. We analyzed patients with atherosclerotic tandem occlusions treated with acute CAS and intracranial thrombectomy who received at least one antiplatelet agent. Aggressive antiplatelet therapy included oral or intravenous glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa or P2Y12 inhibitors. The primary outcome was cervical carotid artery patency at day 1 imaging follow-up.ResultsAmong the 187 included patients, 124 (66.3%) received aspirin alone and 63 (33.7%) received aggressive antiplatelet therapy. There was no significant difference regarding safety outcomes, especially in symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, parenchymal hematoma, and procedural complications. There was a significantly higher rate of carotid stent patency at day 1 in the aggressive antiplatelet therapy group (81.7% vs 97.1%, aOR 17.49, 95% CI 1.10 to 277.2, p=0.042). Odds of favorable functional outcome (90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0–2) were similar between the groups (OR 3.04, 95% CI 0.64 to 14.25, p=0.158).ConclusionsIn tandem occlusions treated with CAS plus thrombectomy, an aggressive antiplatelet regimen was associated with an increased rate of carotid stent patency at day 1 without safety concerns. Randomized trials are warranted to confirm these findings.

Background and Objectives:Declines in stroke admission, intravenous thrombolysis, and mechanical thrombectomy volumes were reported during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a paucity of data on the longer-term effect of the pandemic on stroke volumes over the course of a year and through the second wave of the pandemic. We sought to measure the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the volumes of stroke admissions, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), and mechanical thrombectomy over a one-year period at the onset of the pandemic (March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021) compared with the immediately preceding year (March 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020).Methods:We conducted a longitudinal retrospective study across 6 continents, 56 countries, and 275 stroke centers. We collected volume data for COVID-19 admissions and 4 stroke metrics: ischemic stroke admissions, ICH admissions, intravenous thrombolysis treatments, and mechanical thrombectomy procedures. Diagnoses were identified by their ICD-10 codes or classifications in stroke databases.Results:There were 148,895 stroke admissions in the one-year immediately before compared to 138,453 admissions during the one-year pandemic, representing a 7% decline (95% confidence interval [95% CI 7.1, 6.9]; p<0.0001). ICH volumes declined from 29,585 to 28,156 (4.8%, [5.1, 4.6]; p<0.0001) and IVT volume from 24,584 to 23,077 (6.1%, [6.4, 5.8]; p<0.0001). Larger declines were observed at high volume compared to low volume centers (all p<0.0001). There was no significant change in mechanical thrombectomy volumes (0.7%, [0.6,0.9]; p=0.49). Stroke was diagnosed in 1.3% [1.31,1.38] of 406,792 COVID-19 hospitalizations. SARS-CoV-2 infection was present in 2.9% ([2.82,2.97], 5,656/195,539) of all stroke hospitalizations.Discussion:There was a global decline and shift to lower volume centers of stroke admission volumes, ICH volumes, and IVT volumes during the 1st year of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the prior year. Mechanical thrombectomy volumes were preserved. These results suggest preservation in the stroke care of higher severity of disease through the first pandemic year.Trial Registration Information:This study is registered underNCT04934020.