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.

No abstract

Background Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy. Methods RESTART was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK that assessed whether starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. For this prespecified subgroup analysis, consultant neuroradiologists masked to treatment allocation reviewed brain CT or MRI scans performed before randomisation to confirm participant eligibility and rate features of the intracerebral haemorrhage and surrounding brain. We followed participants for primary (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) and secondary (ischaemic stroke) outcomes for up to 5 years (reported elsewhere). For this report, we analysed eligible participants with intracerebral haemorrhage according to their treatment allocation in primary subgroup analyses of cerebral microbleeds on MRI and in exploratory subgroup analyses of other features on CT or MRI. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN71907627.

Purpose To validate a random forest method for segmenting cerebral white matter lesions (WMLs) on computed tomographic (CT) images in a multicenter cohort of patients with acute ischemic stroke, by comparison with fluid-attenuated recovery (FLAIR) magnetic resonance (MR) images and expert consensus. Materials and Methods A retrospective sample of 1082 acute ischemic stroke cases was obtained that was composed of unselected patients who were treated with thrombolysis or who were undergoing contemporaneous MR imaging and CT, and a subset of International Stroke Thrombolysis-3 trial participants. Automated delineations of WML on images were validated relative to experts' manual tracings on CT images, and co-registered FLAIR MR imaging, and ratings were performed by using two conventional ordinal scales. Analyses included correlations between CT and MR imaging volumes, and agreements between automated and expert ratings. Results Automated WML volumes correlated strongly with expert-delineated WML volumes at MR imaging and CT (r = 0.85 and 0.71 respectively; P < .001). Spatial-similarity of automated maps, relative to WML MR imaging, was not significantly different to that of expert WML tracings on CT images. Individual expert WML volumes at CT correlated well with each other (r = 0.85), but varied widely (range, 91% of mean estimate; median estimate, 11 mL; range of estimated ranges, 0.2-68 mL). Agreements (κ) between automated ratings and consensus ratings were 0.60 (Wahlund system) and 0.64 (van Swieten system) compared with agreements between individual pairs of experts of 0.51 and 0.67, respectively, for the two rating systems (P < .01 for Wahlund system comparison of agreements). Accuracy was unaffected by established infarction, acute ischemic changes, or atrophy (P > .05). Automated preprocessing failure rate was 4%; rating errors occurred in a further 4%. Total automated processing time averaged 109 seconds (range, 79-140 seconds). Conclusion An automated method for quantifying CT cerebral white matter lesions achieves a similar accuracy to experts in unselected and multicenter cohorts.

IntroductionUpper limb (UL) rehabilitation is most effective early after stroke, with higher doses leading to improved outcomes. For the stroke survivor, the repetition may be monotonous. For clinicians, providing a clinically meaningful level of input can be challenging. As such, time spent engaged in UL activity among subacute stroke survivors remains inadequate. Opportunities for the stroke survivor to engage with UL rehabilitation in a safe, accessible and engaging way are essential to improving UL outcomes following stroke. The NeuroBall is a non-immersive virtual reality (VR) digital system designed for stroke rehabilitation, specifically for the arm and hand. The aim of the Rehabilitation using virtual gaming for Hospital and hOMe-Based training for the Upper limb post Stroke study is to determine the safety, feasibility and acceptability of the NeuroBall as a rehabilitation intervention for the UL in subacute stroke.Methods and analysisA feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) will compare the NeuroBall plus usual care with usual care only, in supporting UL rehabilitation over 7 weeks. Twenty-four participants in the subacute poststroke phase will be recruited while on the inpatient or early supported discharge (ESD) stroke pathway. Sixteen participants will be randomised to the intervention group and eight to the control group. Outcomes assessed at baseline and 7 weeks include gross level of disability, arm function, spasticity, pain, fatigue and quality of life (QoL). Safety will be assessed by recording adverse events and using pain, spasticity and fatigue scores. A parallel process evaluation will assess feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. Feasibility will also be determined by assessing fidelity to the intervention. Postintervention, semistructured interviews will be used to explore acceptability with 12 participants from the intervention group, four from the usual care group and with up to nine staff involved in delivering the intervention.Ethics and disseminationThis trial has ethical approval from Brunel University London’s Research Ethics Committee 25257-NHS-Oct/2020-28121-2 and the Wales Research Ethics Committee 5 Bangor (Health and Care Research Wales) REC ref: 20/WA/0347. The study is sponsored by Brunel University London. Contact: Dr Derek Healy, Chair, University Research Ethics committee (Derek.healy@brunel.ac.uk). Trial results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, presented at national and international conferences and distributed to people with stroke.Trial registration numberISRCTN11440079; Pre-results.