SummaryBackgroundStents are an alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis, but previous trials have not established equivalent safety and efficacy. We compared the safety of carotid artery stenting with that of carotid endarterectomy.MethodsThe International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) is a multicentre, international, randomised controlled trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes. Patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Randomisation was by telephone call or fax to a central computerised service and was stratified by centre with minimisation for sex, age, contralateral occlusion, and side of the randomised artery. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up by independent clinicians not directly involved in delivering the randomised treatment. The primary outcome measure of the trial is the 3-year rate of fatal or disabling stroke in any territory, which has not been analysed yet. The main outcome measure for the interim safety analysis was the 120-day rate of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered, number ISRCTN25337470.FindingsThe trial enrolled 1713 patients (stenting group, n=855; endarterectomy group, n=858). Two patients in the stenting group and one in the endarterectomy group withdrew immediately after randomisation, and were not included in the ITT analysis. Between randomisation and 120 days, there were 34 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 4·0%) events of disabling stroke or death in the stenting group compared with 27 (3·2%) events in the endarterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·28, 95% CI 0·77–2·11). The incidence of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction was 8·5% in the stenting group compared with 5·2% in the endarterectomy group (72 vs 44 events; HR 1·69, 1·16–2·45, p=0·006). Risks of any stroke (65 vs 35 events; HR 1·92, 1·27–2·89) and all-cause death (19 vs seven events; HR 2·76, 1·16–6·56) were higher in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group. Three procedural myocardial infarctions were recorded in the stenting group, all of which were fatal, compared with four, all non-fatal, in the endarterectomy group. There was one event of cranial nerve palsy in the stenting group compared with 45 in the endarterectomy group. There were also fewer haematomas of any severity in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group (31 vs 50 events; p=0·0197).InterpretationCompletion of long-term follow-up is needed to establish the efficacy of carotid artery stenting compared with endarterectomy. In the meantime, carotid endarterectomy should remain the treatment of choice for patients suitable for surgery.FundingMedical Research Council, the Stroke Association, Sanofi-Synthélabo, European Union.

Background and Purpose There are reports of decline in the rates of acute emergency presentations during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic including stroke. We performed a meta-analysis of the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on rates of stroke presentations and on rates of reperfusion therapy.Methods Following the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines, we systematically searched the literature for studies reporting changes in stroke presentations and treatment rates before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Aggregated data were pooled using meta-analysis with random-effect models.Results We identified 37 observational studies (n=375,657). Pooled analysis showed decline in rates of all strokes (26.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 22.4 to 29.7) and its subtypes; ischemic (25.3%; 95% CI, 21.0 to 30.0), hemorrhagic (27.6%; 95% CI, 20.4 to 35.5), transient ischemic attacks (41.9%; 95% CI, 34.8 to 49.3), and stroke mimics (45.6%; 95% CI, 33.5 to 58.0) during months of pandemic compared with the pre-pandemic period. The decline was most evident for mild symptoms (40% mild vs. 25%–29% moderate/severe). Although rates of intravenous thrombolytic (IVT) and endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) decreased during pandemic, the likelihood of being treated with IVT and EVT did not differ between the two periods, both in primary and in comprehensive stroke centers (odds ratio [OR], 1.08; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.24 and OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.09, respectively).Conclusions Rates of all strokes types decreased significantly during pandemic. It is of paramount importance that general population should be educated to seek medical care immediately for stroke-like symptoms during COVID-19 pandemic. Whether delay in initiation of secondary prevention would affect eventual stroke outcomes in the long run needs further study.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose of reviewThis review aims to summarize the therapeutic advances and evidence in the medical management of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Recent evidence comparing the efficacy and safety of tenecteplase (TNK) with alteplase for intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in AIS will be highlighted. Recent advances and evidence on improving micro-circulation following endovascular procedures and neuroprotection will be reviewed.Recent findingsA significant number of randomized control studies now support the use of tenecteplase for IVT in AIS. TNK 0.25 mg/kg single bolus is as effective and well tolerated as alteplase 0.9 mg/kg infusion for IVT in AIS. Evidence from randomized control trials (RCTs) has shown effective and well tolerated expansion of the therapeutic window of IVT in the wake-up stroke and up to 9 h after last seen well, using advanced neuroimaging with computed tomography perfusion/MRI. Early evidence suggests that intra-arterial alteplase may help improve microcirculation in patients with large vessel occlusion following successful thrombectomy. However, more trials are required to confirm the results. Similarly, early evidence from a recent RCT showed that remote ischemic conditioning confers potential neuroprotection and improves outcomes in AIS.SummaryConverging evidence has demonstrated that for patients with ischemic stroke presenting at under 4.5 h from the onset, TNK is comparable to alteplase. These data along with the practical advantages of TNK have resulted in a shift to replace intravenous TNK as the standard for thrombolysis. Ongoing studies of IVT with TNK are focussed on defining the optimal dose, expanding the time window with multimodal imaging and defining the role of thrombolysis for bridging patients with stroke due to large vessel occlusion.