Relevant recanalization after IVT and prior to EVT in patients receiving bridging therapy was highly dependent on the occlusion site. These findings suggest that future randomized controlled trials should consider occlusion site and treatment paradigm to specify patients who benefit most from bridging therapy in comparison to EVT or IVT alone.

Introduction: In patients with stroke attributable to cervical artery dissection, we compared endovascular therapy to intravenous thrombolysis regarding three-month outcome, recanalisation and complications. Materials and methods: In a multicentre intravenous thrombolysis/endovascular therapy-register-based cohort study, all consecutive cervical artery dissection patients with intracranial artery occlusion treated within 6 h were eligible for analysis. Endovascular therapy patients (with or without prior intravenous thrombolysis) were compared to intravenous thrombolysis patients regarding (i) excellent three-month outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0-1), (ii) symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, (iii) recanalisation of the occluded intracranial artery and (iv) death. Upon a systematic literature review, we performed a meta-analysis comparing endovascular therapy to intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection patients regarding three-month outcome using a random-effects Mantel-Haenszel model. Results: Among 62 cervical artery dissection patients (median age 48.8 years), 24 received intravenous thrombolysis and 38 received endovascular therapy. Excellent three-month outcome occurred in 23.7% endovascular therapy and 20.8% with intravenous thrombolysis patients. Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage occurred solely among endovascular therapy patients (5/38 patients, 13.2%) while four (80%) of these patients had bridging therapy; 6/38 endovascular therapy and 0/24 intravenous thrombolysis patients died. Four of these 6 endovascular therapy patients had bridging therapy. Recanalisation was achieved in 84.2% endovascular therapy patients and 66.7% intravenous thrombolysis patients

ObjectivesTo derive and externally validate a copeptin-based parsimonious score to predict unfavorable outcome 3 months after an acute ischemic stroke (AIS).MethodsThe derivation cohort consisted of patients with AIS enrolled prospectively at the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland. The validation cohort was prospectively enrolled after the derivation cohort at the University Hospital of Bern and University Hospital Basel, Switzerland, as well as Frankfurt a.M., Germany. The score components were copeptin levels, age, NIH Stroke Scale, and recanalization therapy (CoRisk score). Copeptin levels were measured in plasma drawn within 24 hours of AIS and before any recanalization therapy. The primary outcome of disability and death at 3 months was defined as modified Rankin Scale score of 3 to 6.ResultsOverall, 1,102 patients were included in the analysis; the derivation cohort contributed 319 patients, and the validation cohort contributed 783. An unfavorable outcome was observed among 436 patients (40%). For the 3-month prediction of disability and death, the CoRisk score was well calibrated in the validation cohort, for which the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.819 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.787–0.849). The calibrated CoRisk score correctly classified 75% of patients (95% CI 72–78). The net reclassification index between the calibrated CoRisk scores with and without copeptin was 46% (95% CI 32–60).ConclusionsThe biomarker-based CoRisk score for the prediction of disability and death was externally validated, was well calibrated, and performed better than the same score without copeptin.ClinicalTrials.gov identifierNCT00390962 (derivation cohort) and NCT00878813 (validation cohort).