Background Mechanical thrombectomy and systemic thrombolysis are important therapies for stroke patients. However, there is disagreement about the accompanying risk of acute symptomatic seizures. Methods A retrospective analysis of patients with an acute ischaemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion was performed. The patients were divided into four groups based on whether they received either mechanical thrombectomy (MT) or systemic thrombolysis (ST; group 1: MT+/ST−; group 2: MT+/ST+; group 3: MT−/ST+; group 4: MT−/ST−). Propensity score matching was conducted for each group combination (1:3, 1:4, 2:3, 2:4, 1:2, 3:4) using the covariates “NIHSS at admission”, “mRS prior to event” and “age”. The primary endpoint was defined as the occurrence of acute symptomatic seizures. Results A total of 987 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 208, 264, 169 and 346 belonged to groups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Propensity score matched groups consisted of 160:160, 143:143, 156:156, 144:144, 204:204 and 165:165 patients for the comparisons 1:3, 1:4, 2:3, 2:4, 1:2 and 3:4, respectively. Based on chi-squared tests, there was no significant difference in the frequency of acute symptomatic seizures between the groups. Subgroups varied in their frequency of acute symptomatic seizures, ranging from 2.8 to 3.8%, 2.8–4.4%, 3.6–3.8% and 4.9–6.3% in groups 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Conclusion There was no association between MT or ST and an increased risk of acute symptomatic seizures in patients with an acute ischaemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion who were treated at a primary stroke centre.

IntroductionAcute symptomatic seizures (ASz) after ischemic stroke are associated with increased mortality; therefore, identifying predictors of ASz is important. The purpose of this study was to analyze predictors of ASz in a population of patients with ischemic stroke due to large arterial vessel occlusion (LVO).Materials and MethodsThis retrospective study examined patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by LVO between 2016 and 2020. Identification of predictive factors was performed using univariate and subsequent multiple logistic regression analysis. In addition, subgroup analysis regarding seizure semiology and time of seizure occurrence (≤ 24 h and > 24 h after stroke) was performed.ResultsThe frequency of ASz among 979 patients was 3.9 % (n = 38). Univariate logistic regression analysis revealed an increased risk of ASz in patients with higher National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score at admission or 24 h after admission, hypernatremia at admission ≥ 145 mmol/L, and pneumonia. Further multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that NIHSS 24 h after admission was the strongest predictor of ASz, particularly relating to ASz occurring later than 24 h after stroke. Patients who experienced a seizure within the first 24 h after stroke were more likely to have a generalized tonic-clonic (GTCS) and focal motor seizure; beyond 24 h, seizures with impaired awareness and non-convulsive status epilepticus were more frequent.ConclusionNIHSS score 24 h after admission is a strong predictive factor for the occurrence of ASz in patients with ischemic stroke caused by LVO. The semiology of ASz varied over time, with GTCS occurring more frequently in the first 24 h after stroke.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Background: The Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) is used for the risk assessment of workplace-related activities. Thus far, the paper and pen method (RULA-PP) has been predominantly used for this purpose. In the present study, this method was compared with an RULA evaluation based on kinematic data using inertial measurement units (RULA-IMU). The aim of this study was, on the one hand, to work out the differences between these two measurement methods and, on the other, to make recommendations for the future use of the respective method on the basis of the available findings. Methods: For this purpose, 130 (dentists + dental assistants, paired as teams) subjects from the dental profession were photographed in an initial situation of dental treatment and simultaneously recorded with the IMU system (Xsens). In order to compare both methods statistically, the median value of the difference of both methods, the weighted Cohen’s Kappa, and the agreement chart (mosaic plot) were applied. Results: In Arm and Wrist Analysis—area A—here were differences in risk scores; here, the median difference was 1, and the agreement in the weighted Cohen’s kappa test also remained between 0.07 and 0.16 (no agreement to poor agreement). In area B—Neck, Trunk, and Leg Analysis—the median difference was 0, with at least one poor agreement in the Cohen’s Kappa test of 0.23–0.39. The final score has a median of 0 and a Cohen’s Kappa value of 0.21–0.28. In the mosaic plot, it can be seen that RULA-IMU had a higher discriminatory power overall and more often reached a value of 7 than RULA-PP. Conclusion: The results indicate a systematic difference between the methods. Thus, in the RULA risk assessment, RULA-IMU is mostly one assessment point above RULA-PP. Therefore, future study results of RULA by RULA-IMU can be compared with literature results obtained by RULA-PP to further improve the risk assessment of musculoskeletal diseases.