Objectives: Convalescent plasma (CP) as a passive source of neutralizing antibodies and immunomodulators is a century-old therapeutic option used for the management of viral diseases. We investigated its effectiveness for the treatment of COVID-19. Design: Open-label, parallel-arm, phase II, multicentre, randomized controlled trial. Setting: Thirty-nine public and private hospitals across India. Participants: Hospitalized, moderately ill confirmed COVID-19 patients (PaO2/FiO2: 200-300 or respiratory rate > 24/min and SpO2 ≤ 93% on room air). Intervention: Participants were randomized to either control (best standard of care (BSC)) or intervention (CP + BSC) arm. Two doses of 200 mL CP was transfused 24 hours apart in the intervention arm. Main Outcome Measure: Composite of progression to severe disease (PaO2/FiO2<100) or all-cause mortality at 28 days post-enrolment. Results: Between 22 nd April to 14 th July 2020, 464 participants were enrolled; 235 and 229 in intervention and control arm, respectively. Composite primary outcome was achieved in 44 (18.7%) participants in the intervention arm and 41 (17.9%) in the control arm [aOR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.67, 1.77]. Mortality was documented in 34 (13.6%) and 31 (14.6%) participants in intervention and control arm, respectively [aOR) 1.06 95% CI: -0.61 to 1.83]. Interpretation: CP was not associated with reduction in mortality or progression to severe COVID-19. This trial has high generalizability and approximates real-life setting of CP therapy in settings with limited laboratory capacity. A priori measurement of neutralizing antibody titres in donors and participants may further clarify the role of CP in management of COVID-19.

Acute ischaemic stroke is a major public health priority and will become increasingly relevant to neurologists of the future. The cornerstone of effective stroke care continues to be timely reperfusion treatment. This requires early recognition of symptoms by the public and first responders, triage to an appropriate stroke centre and efficient assessment and investigation by the attending stroke team. The aim of treatment is to achieve recanalisation and reperfusion of the ischaemic penumbra with intravenous thrombolysis and/or endovascular thrombectomy in appropriately selected patients. All patients should be admitted directly to an acute stroke unit for close monitoring for early neurological deterioration and prevention of secondary complications. Prompt investigation of the mechanism of stroke allows patients to start appropriate secondary preventative treatment. Future objectives include improving accessibility to endovascular thrombectomy, using advanced imaging to extend therapeutic windows and developing neuroprotective agents to prevent secondary neuronal damage.

Executive committeeA Algra, A Compter (trial coordinator), L J Kappelle (coprincipal investigator), W J Schonewille, and H B van der Worp (co-principal investigator). Data safety monitoring board M L Bots (chair, epidemiologist), L Defreyne (radiologist), and P J Koudstaal (neurologist). Outcome assessment committees E J van Dijk (neurologist), C J Frijns (neurologist), J Hofmeijer (neurologist), M A van Buchem (radiologist), D R Rutgers (radiologist), B K Velthuis (radiologist), and T D Witkamp (radiologist).

Background and Purpose— Identifying the etiology of acute ischemic stroke is essential for effective secondary prevention. However, in at least one third of ischemic strokes, existing investigative protocols fail to determine the underlying cause. Establishing etiology is complicated by variation in clinical practice, often reflecting preferences of treating clinicians and variable availability of investigative techniques. In this review, we systematically assess the extent to which there exists consensus, disagreement, and gaps in clinical practice recommendations on etiologic workup in acute ischemic stroke. Methods— We identified clinical practice guidelines/consensus statements through searches of 4 electronic databases and hand-searching of websites/reference lists. Two reviewers independently assessed reports for eligibility. We extracted data on report characteristics and recommendations relating to etiologic workup in acute ischemic stroke and in cases of cryptogenic stroke. Quality was assessed using the AGREE II tool (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation). Recommendations were synthesized according to a published algorithm for diagnostic evaluation in cryptogenic stroke. Results— We retrieved 16 clinical practice guidelines and 7 consensus statements addressing acute stroke management (n=12), atrial fibrillation (n=5), imaging (n=5), and secondary prevention (n=1). Five reports were of overall high quality. For all patients, guidelines recommended routine brain imaging, noninvasive vascular imaging, a 12-lead ECG, and routine blood tests/laboratory investigations. Additionally, ECG monitoring (>24 hours) was recommended for patients with suspected embolic stroke and echocardiography for patients with suspected cardiac source. Three reports recommended investigations for rarer causes of stroke. None of the reports provided guidance on the extent of investigation needed before classifying a stroke as cryptogenic. Conclusions— While consensus exists surrounding standard etiologic workup, there is little agreement on more advanced investigations for rarer causes of acute ischemic stroke. This gap in guidance, and in the underpinning evidence, demonstrates missed opportunities to better understand and protect against ongoing stroke risk. Registration— URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ ; Unique identifier: CRD42019127822.

Leptomeningeal carcinomatosis is a devastating condition with very poor prognosis. With advances in cancer treatment leading to improved survival in solid tumours, the incidence of ante-mortem diagnosis of leptomeningeal carcinomatosis is likely to rise. Without a high index of suspicion and appropriate imaging the diagnosis can be missed. We report two cases of leptomeningeal carcinomatosis secondary to metastatic breast disease with varied clinical presentation where the diagnosis was initially missed.

Giant cell arteritis is the most common primary systemic vasculitis in adults aged ≥50 years and peaks in the eighth decade of life. Common symptoms include headache, scalp tenderness and jaw claudication. Elevated acute phase reactants (erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein) are present in >90% of patients. Visual loss is a well-recognised complication, but approximately 2–4% of giant cell arteritis patients experience stroke, most frequently in the vertebrobasilar territory. We describe a 72-year-old male who developed bilateral vertebral artery occlusion and middle cerebellar peduncle infarction secondary to giant cell arteritis in spite of high-dose steroids.

No abstract

BackgroundStroke is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Identifying the aetiology of ischaemic stroke is essential in order to initiate appropriate and timely secondary prevention measures to reduce the risk of recurrence. For the majority of ischaemic strokes, the aetiology can be readily identified, but in at least 30% of cases, the exact aetiology cannot be determined using existing investigative protocols. Such strokes are classed as ‘cryptogenic’ or as a stroke of unknown origin. However, there exists substantial variation in clinical practice when investigating cases of seemingly cryptogenic stroke, often reflecting local service availability and the preferences of treating clinicians. This variation in practice is compounded by the lack of international consensus as to the optimum level and timing of investigations required following a stroke. To address this gap, we aim to systematically review and compare recommendations in evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) that relate to the assessment and investigation of the aetiology of ischaemic stroke, and any subsequent diagnosis of cryptogenic stroke.MethodWe will search for CPGs using electronic databases (MEDLINE, Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC), EMBASE, and CINAHL), relevant websites and search engines (e.g. guideline specific websites, governmental, charitable, and professional practice organisations) and hand-searching of bibliographies and reference lists. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts and CPGs using a pre-defined relevance criteria form. From each included CPG, we will extract definitions and terms for cryptogenic stroke; recommendations related to assessment and investigation of the aetiology of stroke, including the grade of recommendations and underpinning evidence. The quality of the included CPGs will be assessed using the AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation) tool. Recommendations across the CPGs will be summarised descriptively highlighting areas of convergence and divergence between CPGs.DiscussionTo our knowledge, this will be the first review to systematically compare recommendations of international CPGs on investigating the aetiology of ischaemic stroke. The findings will allow for a better understanding of international perspectives on the optimum level of investigations required following a stroke and thus contribute to achieving greater international consensus on best practice in this important and complex area.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42019127822.