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.

No abstract

Retrospective, unblinded, nonrandomized comparisons between these 2 strategies have been inconclusive 13 and no randomized evaluation of these strategies has been conducted.14 We hypothesized that the combination of aspirin plus clopidogrel was 25% superior to dose-adjusted warfarin on prevention of new vascular Background and Purpose-Severe atherosclerosis in the aortic arch is associated with a high risk of recurrent vascular events, but the optimal antithrombotic strategy is unclear. Methods-This prospective randomized controlled, open-labeled trial, with blinded end point evaluation (PROBE design) tested superiority of aspirin 75 to 150 mg/d plus clopidogrel 75 mg/d (A+C) over warfarin therapy (international normalized ratio 2-3) in patients with ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, or peripheral embolism with plaque in the thoracic aorta >4 mm and no other identified embolic source. The primary end point included cerebral infarction, myocardial infarction, peripheral embolism, vascular death, or intracranial hemorrhage. Follow-up visits occurred at 1 month and then every 4 months post randomization. Results-The trial was stopped after 349 patients were randomized during a period of 8 years and 3 months. After a median follow-up of 3.4 years, the primary end point occurred in 7.6% (13/172) and 11.3% (20/177) of patients on A+C and on warfarin, respectively (log-rank, P=0.2). The adjusted hazard ratio was 0.76 (95% confidence interval, 0.36-1.61; P=0.5). Major hemorrhages including intracranial hemorrhages occurred in 4 and 6 patients in the A+C and warfarin groups, respectively. Vascular deaths occurred in 0 patients in A+C arm compared with 6 (3.4%) patients in the warfarin arm (log-rank, P=0.013). Time in therapeutic range (67% of the time for international normalized ratio 2-3) analysis by tertiles showed no significant differences across groups. Conclusions-Because of lack of power, this trial was inconclusive and results should be taken as hypothesis generating. Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00235248.

Background and Purpose— Acute stroke patients with a large ischemic core may still benefit from mechanical thrombectomy (MT), but the predictors of clinical outcome are not well known after MT. We investigated the clinical and imaging factors associated with good outcome and mortality at 90 days in acute stroke patients with a large baseline ischemic core treated with MT. Methods— Data from the multicentric prospective ETIS (Endovascular Treatment in Ischemic Stroke) registry of consecutive acute ischemic stroke patients treated with MT from January 1, 2012, to August 31, 2016, were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline large ischemic core was defined as diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI)–Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score of ≤5. The degree of disability was assessed by the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days. Outcomes included good outcome (modified Rankin Scale score of ≤2), and mortality (modified Rankin Scale score of 6). Results— Among 216 patients with DWI-Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score of ≤5 (median DWI volume 77 mL, interquartile range 52–120 mL) treated with MT, good outcome was achieved in 55 (25.4%) patients and 75 (34.7%) died at 90 days. Hemorrhagic transformation was detected in 40 (18.5%) patients within 24 hours post-MT. Older age (adjusted odds ratio [OR] for every 10 years, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48–0.80; P <0.001) and increased DWI lesional volume (adjusted OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97–0.99; P <0.001) were associated with a lower chance of achieving a good outcome, while successful recanalization (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction [mTICI] grades of ≤2b) predicted good outcome (adjusted OR, 4.56; 95% CI, 1.79–11.62; P =0.001). Successful recanalization (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.22–0.97; P =0.042), increased DWI lesional volume (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01–1.03; P <0.001), age (OR for every 10 years, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.31–2.26; P <0.001), and diabetes mellitus (OR, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.34–7.8; P =0.009) were independent predictors of 90-day mortality. Conclusions— Successful recanalization and baseline DWI lesional volume are the strongest predictors of outcome in stroke patients with a large ischemic core.

Background and Purpose— Whether all acute stroke patients with large vessel occlusion need to undergo intravenous thrombolysis before mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is debated as (1) the incidence of post-thrombolysis early recanalization (ER) is still unclear; (2) thrombolysis may be harmful in patients unlikely to recanalize; and, conversely, (3) transfer for MT may be unnecessary in patients highly likely to recanalize. Here, we determined the incidence and predictors of post-thrombolysis ER in patients referred for MT and derive ER prediction scores for trial design. Methods— Registries from 4 MT-capable centers gathering patients referred for MT and thrombolyzed either on site (mothership) or in a non MT-capable center (drip-and-ship) after magnetic resonance– or computed tomography–based imaging between 2015 and 2017. ER was identified on either first angiographic run or noninvasive imaging. In the magnetic resonance imaging subsample, thrombus length was determined on T2*-based susceptibility vessel sign. Independent predictors of no-ER were identified using multivariable logistic regression models, and scores were developed according to the magnitude of regression coefficients. Similar registries from 4 additional MT-capable centers were used as validation cohort. Results— In the derivation cohort (N=633), ER incidence was ≈20%. In patients with susceptibility vessel sign (n=498), no-ER was independently predicted by long thrombus, proximal occlusion, and mothership paradigm. A 6-point score derived from these variables showed strong discriminative power for no-ER (C statistic, 0.854) and was replicated in the validation cohort (n=353; C statistic, 0.888). A second score derived from the whole sample (including negative T2* or computed tomography–based imaging) also showed good discriminative power and was similarly validated. Highest grades on both scores predicted no-ER with >90% specificity, whereas low grades did not reliably predict ER. Conclusions— The substantial ER rate underlines the benefits derived from thrombolysis in bridging populations. Both prediction scores afforded high specificity for no-ER, but not for ER, which has implications for trial design.