for the RE-SPECT CVT Study Group IMPORTANCE Patients with cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) are at risk of recurrent venous thrombotic events (VTEs). Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants have not been evaluated in randomized controlled trials in CVT.OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy and safety of dabigatran etexilate with those of dose-adjusted warfarin in preventing recurrent VTEs in patients who have experienced a CVT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS RE-SPECT CVT is an exploratory, prospective, randomized (1:1), parallel-group, open-label, multicenter clinical trial with blinded end-point adjudication (PROBE design). It was performed from December 21, 2016, to June 22, 2018, with a follow-up of 25 weeks, at 51 tertiary sites in 9 countries (). Adult consecutive patients with acute CVT, who were stable after 5 to 15 days of treatment with parenteral heparin, were screened for eligibility. Patients with CVT associated with central nervous system infection or major trauma were excluded, but those with intracranial hemorrhage from index CVT were allowed to participate. After exclusions, 120 patients were randomized. Data were analyzed following the intention-to-treat approach.INTERVENTIONS Dabigatran, 150 mg twice daily, or dose-adjusted warfarin for a treatment period of 24 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary outcome was a composite of patients with a new VTE (recurrent CVT, deep vein thrombosis of any limb, pulmonary embolism, and splanchnic vein thrombosis) or major bleeding during the study period. Secondary outcomes were cerebral venous recanalization and clinically relevant non-major bleeding events. RESULTSIn total, 120 patients with CVT were randomized to the 2 treatment groups (60 to dabigatran and 60 to dose-adjusted warfarin). Of the randomized patients, the mean (SD) age was 45.2 (13.8) years, and 66 (55.0%) were women. The mean (SD) duration of exposure was 22.3 (6.16) weeks for the dabigatran group and 23.0 (5.20) weeks for the warfarin group. No recurrent VTEs were observed. One (1.7%; 95% CI, 0.0-8.9) major bleeding event (intestinal) was recorded in the dabigatran group, and 2 (3.3%; 95% CI, 0.4-11.5) (intracranial) in the warfarin group. One additional patient (1.7; 95% CI, 0.0-8.9) in the warfarin group experienced a clinically relevant non-major bleeding event. Recanalization occurred in 33 patients in the dabigatran group (60.0%; 95% CI, 45.9-73.0) and in 35 patients in the warfarin group (67.3%; 95% CI, 52.9-79.7). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThis trial found that patients who had CVT anticoagulated with either dabigatran or warfarin had low risk of recurrent VTEs, and the risk of bleeding was similar with both medications, suggesting that both dabigatran and warfarin may be safe and effective for preventing recurrent VTEs in patients with CVT. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02913326

Lack of stroke specialists determines that many European rural areas remain underserved. Use of telemedicine in stroke care has shown to be safe, increase use of evidence-based therapy and enable coverage of large areas of low population density. The aim of this article is to summarise the following recommendations of the Telestroke Committee of the European Stroke Organisation on the setup of telestroke networks in Europe: Hospitals participating in telestroke networks should be chosen according to criteria that include population density, transportation distance, geographic specifics and in-hospital infrastructure and professional resources. Three hospital categories are identified to be part of a hub-and-spoke network: (1) the Telemedicine Stroke Centre (an European Stroke Organisation stroke centre or equivalent with specific infrastructure and setup for network and telemedicine support), (2) the telemedicine-assisted stroke Unit (equivalent to an European Stroke Organisation stroke unit but without 24 h onsite stroke expertise) and (3) the telemedicine-assisted stroke ready hospital (only covering hyperacute treatment in the emergency department and transferring all patients for further treatment).

Granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) may enhance recovery from stroke through neuroprotective mechanisms if administered early, or neurorepair if given later. Several small trials suggest administration is safe but effects on efficacy are unclear. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCT) assessing G-CSF in patients with hyperacute, acute, subacute or chronic stroke, and asked Investigators to share individual patient data on baseline characteristics, stroke severity and type, end-of-trial modified Rankin Scale (mRS), Barthel Index, haematological parameters, serious adverse events and death. Multiple variable analyses were adjusted for age, sex, baseline severity and time-totreatment. Individual patient data were obtained for 6 of 10 RCTs comprising 196 stroke patients (116 G-CSF, 80 placebo), mean age 67.1 (SD 12.9), 92% ischaemic, median NIHSS 10 (IQR 5-15), randomised 11 days (interquartile range IQR 4-238) post ictus; data from three commercial trials were not shared. G-CSF did not improve mRS (ordinal regression), odds ratio OR 1.12 (95% confidence interval 0.64 to 1.96, p = 0.62). There were more patients with a serious adverse event in the G-CSF group (29.6% versus 7.5%, p = 0.07) with no significant difference in all-cause mortality (G-CSF 11.2%, placebo 7.6%, p = 0.4). Overall, G-CSF did not improve stroke outcome in this individual patient data meta-analysis.

No abstract

Granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) functions both as a neuroprotectant and a stimulator of autologous bone marrow stem cell release. Therefore, administration of G-CSF should improve the outcome of stroke. Here, we examine the safety of using G-CSF to treat acute ischemic stroke using a randomized controlled trial involving 20 adult patients presenting with ischemia in the carotid region within 48 h of onset. The experimental group (n = 10) received subcutaneous G-CSF injections (10 mg kg(-1) day(-1)) in addition to conventional therapy for 5 days. The primary outcome was motor function as measured by the modified Rankin Scale 180 days post-stroke. Safety was evaluated according to the frequency of hemorrhagic transformation of infarctions and serious adverse events. Only six patients in the experimental group completed full course of treatment, while four patients (three in the control and one in the experimental group) were lost to follow-up. We found the experimental and control groups did not differ significantly in either neurological impairment or degree of disability/dependence at 180 days post-stroke. We conclude that while adding G-CSF (10 mg kg(-1) day(-1)) to acute ischemic stroke therapy for 5 days is safe, its efficacy remains unproven.