S troke-survivors are at particular risk of cognitive decline. Three month dementia prevalence is ≥30%, and even minor stroke events have cognitive sequel.1,2 Poststroke cognitive impairment is associated with increased mortality, disability, and institutionalization. 3 The importance of cognitive change is highlighted by stroke-survivors themselves. In a national priority setting exercise, cognitive impairment was voted the single most important topic for stroke research. 4 A first step in management of cognitive problems is recognition and diagnosis. Informal clinician assessment will miss important cognitive problems, 5 and formal cognitive testing is recommended. [6][7][8] The ideal would be expert, multidisciplinary assessment informed by comprehensive investigations. This approach is not feasible at a population level. In practice, a 2-step system is adopted, with baseline cognitive testing used for screening or triage and specialist assessment to define the cognitive problem offered depending on the results.Although there is general agreement on the merits of poststroke cognitive assessment, there is no consensus on a preferred testing strategy. [6][7][8] Various cognitive screening tools are available with substantial variation in test used. 9,10 The clinical meaning of cognitive problems after stroke will vary according to test context. Cognitive impairment diagnosed in the first days post stroke may reflect a mix of delirium, strokespecific impairments, and prestroke cognitive decline. 2,11,12 In the longer term, assessments aim to make or refute a dementia diagnosis. Common to all test situations is a final diagnosis of presence/absence of clinically important impairments. A screening assessment should detect this clinical syndrome of all-cause, poststroke multidomain cognitive impairment.Background and Purpose-Guidelines recommend screening stroke-survivors for cognitive impairments. We sought to collate published data on test accuracy of cognitive screening tools. Methods-Index test was any direct, cognitive screening assessment compared against reference standard diagnosis of (undifferentiated) multidomain cognitive impairment/dementia. We used a sensitive search statement to search multiple, crossdisciplinary databases from inception to January 2014. Titles, abstracts, and articles were screened by independent researchers. We described risk of bias using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool and reporting quality using Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy guidance. Where data allowed, we pooled test accuracy using bivariate methods. Results-From 19 182 titles, we reviewed 241 articles, 35 suitable for inclusion. There was substantial heterogeneity: 25 differing screening tests; differing stroke settings (acute stroke, n=11 articles), and reference standards used (neuropsychological battery, n=21 articles). One article was graded low risk of bias; common issues were case-control methodology (n=7 articles) and missing data (n=22 Lees et al Cognitive Screening in S...

Highlights► Risk factors for stroke include atherosclerosis, obesity, diabetes and hypertension. ► Stroke risk factors are associated with peripheral inflammation. ► Corpulent rats and atherogenic mice show increased inflammation in the brain. ► Pilot data show that patients at risk of stroke may also develop brain inflammation. ► Chronic peripheral inflammation can drive inflammatory changes in the brain.

SummaryBackgroundResults of small trials indicate that fluoxetine might improve functional outcomes after stroke. The FOCUS trial aimed to provide a precise estimate of these effects.MethodsFOCUS was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial done at 103 hospitals in the UK. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical stroke diagnosis, were enrolled and randomly assigned between 2 days and 15 days after onset, and had focal neurological deficits. Patients were randomly allocated fluoxetine 20 mg or matching placebo orally once daily for 6 months via a web-based system by use of a minimisation algorithm. The primary outcome was functional status, measured with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), at 6 months. Patients, carers, health-care staff, and the trial team were masked to treatment allocation. Functional status was assessed at 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. Patients were analysed according to their treatment allocation. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83290762.FindingsBetween Sept 10, 2012, and March 31, 2017, 3127 patients were recruited. 1564 patients were allocated fluoxetine and 1563 allocated placebo. mRS data at 6 months were available for 1553 (99·3%) patients in each treatment group. The distribution across mRS categories at 6 months was similar in the fluoxetine and placebo groups (common odds ratio adjusted for minimisation variables 0·951 [95% CI 0·839–1·079]; p=0·439). Patients allocated fluoxetine were less likely than those allocated placebo to develop new depression by 6 months (210 [13·43%] patients vs 269 [17·21%]; difference 3·78% [95% CI 1·26–6·30]; p=0·0033), but they had more bone fractures (45 [2·88%] vs 23 [1·47%]; difference 1·41% [95% CI 0·38–2·43]; p=0·0070). There were no significant differences in any other event at 6 or 12 months.InterpretationFluoxetine 20 mg given daily for 6 months after acute stroke does not seem to improve functional outcomes. Although the treatment reduced the occurrence of depression, it increased the frequency of bone fractures. These results do not support the routine use of fluoxetine either for the prevention of post-stroke depression or to promote recovery of function.FundingUK Stroke Association and NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Background and Purpose-The characteristics of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) may vary by ICH location because of differences in the distribution of underlying cerebral small vessel diseases. Therefore, we investigated the incidence, characteristics, and outcome of lobar and nonlobar ICH. Methods-In a population-based, prospective inception cohort study of ICH, we used multiple overlapping sources of case ascertainment and follow-up to identify and validate ICH diagnoses in 2010 to 2011 in an adult population of 695 335. Results-There were 128 participants with first-ever primary ICH. The overall incidence of lobar ICH was similar to nonlobar ICH (9.