Background A new syndrome of vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) has emerged as a rare side-effect of vaccination against COVID-19. Cerebral venous thrombosis is the most common manifestation of this syndrome but, to our knowledge, has not previously been described in detail. We aimed to document the features of post-vaccination cerebral venous thrombosis with and without VITT and to assess whether VITT is associated with poorer outcomes. Methods For this multicentre cohort study, clinicians were asked to submit all cases in which COVID-19 vaccination preceded the onset of cerebral venous thrombosis, regardless of the type of vaccine, interval between vaccine and onset of cerebral venous thrombosis symptoms, or blood test results. We collected clinical characteristics, laboratory results (including the results of tests for anti-platelet factor 4 antibodies where available), and radiological features at hospital admission of patients with cerebral venous thrombosis after vaccination against COVID-19, with no exclusion criteria. We defined cerebral venous thrombosis cases as VITT-associated if the lowest platelet count recorded during admission was below 150 × 10 9 per L and, if the D-dimer was measured, the highest value recorded was greater than 2000 μg/L. We compared the VITT and non-VITT groups for the proportion of patients who had died or were dependent on others to help them with their activities of daily living (modified Rankin score 3–6) at the end of hospital admission (the primary outcome of the study). The VITT group were also compared with a large cohort of patients with cerebral venous thrombosis described in the International Study on Cerebral Vein and Dural Sinus Thrombosis. Findings Between April 1 and May 20, 2021, we received data on 99 patients from collaborators in 43 hospitals across the UK. Four patients were excluded because they did not have definitive evidence of cerebral venous thrombosis on imaging. Of the remaining 95 patients, 70 had VITT and 25 did not. The median age of the VITT group (47 years, IQR 32–55) was lower than in the non-VITT group (57 years; 41–62; p=0·0045). Patients with VITT-associated cerebral venous thrombosis had more intracranial veins thrombosed (median three, IQR 2–4) than non-VITT patients (two, 2–3; p=0·041) and more frequently had extracranial thrombosis (31 [44%] of 70 patients) compared with non-VITT patients (one [4%] of 25 patients; p=0·0003). The primary outcome of death or dependency occurred more frequently in patients with VITT-associated cerebral venous thrombosis (33 [47%] of 70 patients) compared with the non-VITT control group (four [16%] of 25 patients; p=0·0061). This adverse outcome was less frequent in patients with VITT who received non-heparin anticoagulants (18 [36%] of 50 patients) compared with those who did not (15 [75%] of 20 patients; p=0·0031), and in those who received intravenous immunoglobulin (22 [40%] of 55...

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.

We set out to determine which characteristics and outcomes of stroke are associated with COVID-19. Methods This case-control study included patients admitted with stroke to 13 hospitals in England and Scotland between 9 th March and 5 th July 2020. We collected data on86strokes (81 ischaemic strokes and 5intracerebral haemorrhages)in patients withevidence of COVID-19 at the time of stroke onset (Cases). They were compared with 1384strokes(1193 ischaemic strokes and 191 intracerebral haemorrhages) in patients admitted during the same time periodwho never had evidence of COVID-19 (Controls). In addition the whole group of stroke admissions, including another 37 in patients who appear to have developed COVID-19 after their stroke, were included in two logistic regression analyses examining which features wereindependently associated with COVID-19 status and with inpatient mortality. Results Cases with ischaemic stroke were more likely than ischaemic controls to occur in Asians (18.8% vs 6.7%, p<0.0002), were more likely to involve multiple large vessel occlusions (17•9% vs 8.1%, p<0•03), were more severe (median NIHSS 8 vs 5, p<0•002), were associated with higher D-dimer levels (p<0•01) and were associated withmore severe disability on discharge (median mRS 4 vs 3, p<0•0001) and inpatientdeath (19.8% vs9•6%, p<0•0001). Recurrence of stroke during the patient's admission was rare in Cases and Controls (2.3% vs1.0%, NS). Conclusions Our data suggest that COVID-19 may be an important modifier of the onset, characteristics and outcome of acute ischaemic stroke.

IMPORTANCE Hypoxia is common in the first few days after acute stroke, is frequently intermittent, and is often undetected. Oxygen supplementation could prevent hypoxia and secondary neurological deterioration and thus has the potential to improve recovery. OBJECTIVE To assess whether routine prophylactic low-dose oxygen therapy was more effective than control oxygen administration in reducing death and disability at 90 days, and if so, whether oxygen given at night only, when hypoxia is most frequent, and oxygen administration is least likely to interfere with rehabilitation, was more effective than continuous supplementation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSIn this single-blind randomized clinical trial, 8003 adults with acute stroke were enrolled from 136 participating centers in the United Kingdom within 24 hours of hospital admission if they had no clear indications for or contraindications to oxygen treatment (first patient enrolled April 24, 2008; last follow-up January 27, 2015).INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomized 1:1:1 to continuous oxygen for 72 hours (n = 2668), nocturnal oxygen (21:00 to 07:00 hours) for 3 nights (n = 2667), or control (oxygen only if clinically indicated; n = 2668). Oxygen was given via nasal tubes at 3 L/min if baseline oxygen saturation was 93% or less and at 2 L/min if oxygen saturation was greater than 93%. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was reported using the modified Rankin Scale score (disability range, 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]; minimum clinically important difference, 1 point), assessed at 90 days by postal questionnaire (participant aware, assessor blinded). The modified Rankin Scale score was analyzed by ordinal logistic regression, which yields a common odds ratio (OR) for a change from one disability level to the next better (lower) level; OR greater than 1.00 indicates improvement.RESULTS A total of 8003 patients (4398 (55%) men; mean [SD] age, 72 [13] years; median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, 5; mean baseline oxygen saturation, 96.6%) were enrolled. The primary outcome was available for 7677 (96%) participants. The unadjusted OR for a better outcome (calculated via ordinal logistic regression) was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.05; P = .47) for oxygen vs control, and the OR was 1.03 (95% CI, 0.93 to 1.13; P = .61) for continuous vs nocturnal oxygen. No subgroup could be identified that benefited from oxygen. At least 1 serious adverse event occurred in 348 (13.0%) participants in the continuous oxygen group, 294 (11.0%) in the nocturnal group, and 322 (12.1%) in the control group. No significant harms were identified.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among nonhypoxic patients with acute stroke, the prophylactic use of low-dose oxygen supplementation did not reduce death or disability at 3 months. These findings do not support low-dose oxygen in this setting.

Summary Background Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention. Funding British Heart Foundation.