In patients with acute stroke with an unknown time of onset, intravenous alteplase guided by a mismatch between diffusion-weighted imaging and FLAIR in the region of ischemia resulted in a significantly better functional outcome and numerically more intracranial hemorrhages than placebo at 90 days. (Funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Program; WAKE-UP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01525290; and EudraCT number, 2011-005906-32 .).

Among patients with a PFO who had had a cryptogenic stroke, the risk of subsequent ischemic stroke was lower among those assigned to PFO closure combined with antiplatelet therapy than among those assigned to antiplatelet therapy alone; however, PFO closure was associated with higher rates of device complications and atrial fibrillation. (Funded by W.L. Gore and Associates; Gore REDUCE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00738894 .).

No abstract

Background and Purpose— Remote ischemic preconditioning is neuroprotective in models of acute cerebral ischemia. We tested the effect of prehospital rPerC as an adjunct to treatment with intravenous alteplase in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Methods— Open-label blinded outcome proof-of-concept study of prehospital, paramedic-administered rPerC at a 1:1 ratio in consecutive patients with suspected acute stroke. After neurological examination and MRI, patients with verified stroke receiving alteplase treatment were included and received MRI at 24 hours and 1 month and clinical re-examination after 3 months. The primary end point was penumbral salvage, defined as the volume of the perfusion–diffusion mismatch not progressing to infarction after 1 month. Results— Four hundred forty-three patients were randomized after provisional consent, 247 received rPerC and 196 received standard treatment. Patients with a nonstroke diagnosis (n=105) were excluded from further examinations. The remaining patients had transient ischemic attack (n=58), acute ischemic stroke (n=240), or hemorrhagic stroke (n=37). Transient ischemic attack was more frequent ( P =0.006), and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score on admission was lower ( P =0.016) in the intervention group compared with controls. Penumbral salvage, final infarct size at 1 month, infarct growth between baseline and 1 month, and clinical outcome after 3 months did not differ among groups. After adjustment for baseline perfusion and diffusion lesion severity, voxelwise analysis showed that rPerC reduced tissue risk of infarction ( P =0.0003). Conclusions— Although the overall results were neutral, a tissue survival analysis suggests that prehospital rPerC may have immediate neuroprotective effects. Future clinical trials should take such immediate effects, and their duration, into account. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00975962.

IMPORTANCE Endovascular therapy (EVT) is the standard of care for select patients who had a stroke caused by a large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation, but there is uncertainty regarding the optimal anesthetic approach during EVT. Observational studies suggest that general anesthesia (GA) is associated with worse outcomes compared with conscious sedation (CS). OBJECTIVE To examine the effect of type of anesthesia during EVT on infarct growth and clinical outcome. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The General or Local Anesthesia in Intra Arterial Therapy (GOLIATH) trial was a single-center prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded end-point evaluation that enrolled patients from March 12, 2015, to February 2, 2017. Although the trial screened 1501 patients, it included 128 consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusions in the anterior circulation within 6 hours of onset; 1372 patients who did not fulfill inclusion criteria and 1 who did not provide consent were excluded. Primary analysis was unadjusted and according to the intention-to-treat principle. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to either the GA group or the CS group (1:1 allocation) before EVT. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end point was infarct growth between magnetic resonance imaging scans performed before EVT and 48 to 72 hours after EVT. The hypothesis formulated before data collection was that patients who were under CS would have less infarct growth. RESULTS Of 128 patients included in the trial, 65 were randomized to GA, and 63 were randomized to CS. For the entire cohort, the mean (SD) age was 71.4 (11.4) years, and 62 (48.4%) were women. Baseline demographic and clinical variables were balanced between the GA and CS treatment arms. The median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 18 (interquartile range [IQR], 14-21). Four patients (6.3%) in the CS group were converted to the GA group. Successful reperfusion was significantly higher in the GA arm than in the CS arm (76.9% vs 60.3%; P = .04). The difference in the volume of infarct growth among patients treated under GA or CS did not reach statistical significance (median [IQR] growth, 8.2 [2.2-38.6] mL vs 19.4 [2.4-79.0] mL; P = .10). There were better clinical outcomes in the GA group, with an odds ratio for a shift to a lower modified Rankin Scale score of 1.91 (95% CI, 1.03-3.56). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE For patients who underwent thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusions in the anterior circulation, GA did not result in worse tissue or clinical outcomes compared with CS. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02317237

Central post-stroke pain (CPSP) is a neuropathic pain syndrome characterized by constant or intermittent pain in a body part occurring after stroke and associated with sensory abnormalities in the painful body part. This study describes CPSP prospectively during the first year after stroke and characterizes the cerebrovascular lesions and neurological signs associated with the CPSP syndrome. Two hundred and sixty-seven consecutively admitted patients younger than 81 years were examined in the first week, at 1, 6 and 12 months after stroke. Sensibility to touch (cotton wool), temperature (20 degrees C and 40 degrees C), and pinprick was studied using the contralateral face and extremity as control. A CT scan was done 8 (median) days (range: 1-34 days) after stroke. Two hundred and seven (78%) patients surviving at least 6 months who were able to communicate reliably formed the basis of the study. Abnormal sensory signs were found at least once in 87 (42%) patients. CPSP was found in 16 (8%) patients of whom all but 1 patient also had evoked dysesthesia or allodynia. Further 1 patient had persistent evoked dysesthesia but denied pain. CPSP was not related to sex or age. In patients with single acute cerebral lesions there were no relation between size or location of the lesions and the presence of CPSP. The pain was light in 6 (3%) patients and moderate to severe in 10 (5%) patients. The pain quality was usually lacerating or aching. Fifteen (94%) patients had decreased temperature, touch and pain sensibility and 9 (56%) reported allodynia to cold stimulation and another 9 (56%) patients reported this to touch.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Campbell, B. C.V. et al. (2019) Penumbral imaging and functional outcome in patients with anterior circulation ischaemic stroke treated with endovascular thrombectomy versus medical therapy: a meta-analysis of individual patient-level data.ABSTRACT Background: CT-perfusion (CTP) and MRI may assist patient selection for endovascular thrombectomy. We aimed to establish whether imaging assessments of ischaemic core and penumbra volumes were associated with functional outcomes and treatment effect.

SummaryBackgroundRemote ischaemic conditioning with transient ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm has been shown to reduce myocardial infarct size in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). We investigated whether remote ischaemic conditioning could reduce the incidence of cardiac death and hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months.MethodsWe did an international investigator-initiated, prospective, single-blind, randomised controlled trial (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI) at 33 centres across the UK, Denmark, Spain, and Serbia. Patients (age >18 years) with suspected STEMI and who were eligible for PPCI were randomly allocated (1:1, stratified by centre with a permuted block method) to receive standard treatment (including a sham simulated remote ischaemic conditioning intervention at UK sites only) or remote ischaemic conditioning treatment (intermittent ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm through four cycles of 5-min inflation and 5-min deflation of an automated cuff device) before PPCI. Investigators responsible for data collection and outcome assessment were masked to treatment allocation. The primary combined endpoint was cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02342522) and is completed.FindingsBetween Nov 6, 2013, and March 31, 2018, 5401 patients were randomly allocated to either the control group (n=2701) or the remote ischaemic conditioning group (n=2700). After exclusion of patients upon hospital arrival or loss to follow-up, 2569 patients in the control group and 2546 in the intervention group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. At 12 months post-PPCI, the Kaplan-Meier-estimated frequencies of cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure (the primary endpoint) were 220 (8·6%) patients in the control group and 239 (9·4%) in the remote ischaemic conditioning group (hazard ratio 1·10 [95% CI 0·91–1·32], p=0·32 for intervention versus control). No important unexpected adverse events or side effects of remote ischaemic conditioning were observed.InterpretationRemote ischaemic conditioning does not improve clinical outcomes (cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure) at 12 months in patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI.FundingBritish Heart Foundation, University College London Hospitals/University College London Biomedical Research Centre, Danish Innovation Foundation, Novo Nordisk Foundation, TrygFonden.