Background and objectives:COVID-19 related inflammation, endothelial dysfunction and coagulopathy may increase the bleeding risk and lower efficacy of revascularization treatments in patients with acute ischemic stroke. We aimed to evaluate the safety and outcomes of revascularization treatments in patients with acute ischemic stroke and COVID-19.Methods:Retrospective multicenter cohort study of consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke receiving intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and/or endovascular treatment (EVT) between March 2020 and June 2021, tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection. With a doubly-robust model combining propensity score weighting and multivariate regression, we studied the association of COVID-19 with intracranial bleeding complications and clinical outcomes. Subgroup analyses were performed according to treatment groups (IVT-only and EVT).Results:Of a total of 15128 included patients from 105 centers, 853 (5.6%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. 5848 (38.7%) patients received IVT-only, and 9280 (61.3%) EVT (with or without IVT). Patients with COVID-19 had a higher rate of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH) (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.53; 95% CI 1.16–2.01), symptomatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (SSAH) (OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.20–2.69), SICH and/or SSAH combined (OR 1.56; 95% CI 1.23–1.99), 24-hour (OR 2.47; 95% CI 1.58–3.86) and 3-month mortality (OR 1.88; 95% CI 1.52–2.33).COVID-19 patients also had an unfavorable shift in the distribution of the modified Rankin score at 3 months (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.26–1.60).Discussion:Patients with acute ischemic stroke and COVID-19 showed higher rates of intracranial bleeding complications and worse clinical outcomes after revascularization treatments than contemporaneous non-COVID-19 treated patients. Current available data does not allow direct conclusions to be drawn on the effectiveness of revascularization treatments in COVID-19 patients, or to establish different treatment recommendations in this subgroup of patients with ischemic stroke. Our findings can be taken into consideration for treatment decisions, patient monitoring and establishing prognosis.

Background and Purpose— The TST trial (Treat Stroke to Target) evaluated the benefit of targeting a LDL (low-density lipoprotein) cholesterol of <70 mg/dL to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in 2860 patients with ischemic stroke with atherosclerotic stenosis of cerebral vasculature or aortic arch plaque >4 mm, in a French and Korean population. The follow-up lasted a median of 5.3 years in French patients (similar to the median follow-up time in the SPARCL trial [Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in Cholesterol Level]) and 2.0 years in Korean patients. Exposure duration to statin is a well-known driver for cardiovascular risk reduction. We report here the TST results in the French cohort. Methods— One thousand seventy-three French patients were assigned to <70 mg/dL (1.8 mmol/L) and 1075 to 100±10 mg/dL (90–110 mg/dL, 2.3–2.8 mmol/L). To achieve these goals, investigators used the statin and dosage of their choice and added ezetimibe on top if needed. The primary outcome was the composite of ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, new symptoms requiring urgent coronary or carotid revascularization and vascular death. Results— After a median follow-up of 5.3 years, the achieved LDL cholesterol was 66 (1.69 mmol/L) and 96 mg/dL (2.46 mmol/L) on average, respectively. The primary end point occurred in 9.6% and 12.9% of patients, respectively (HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.57–0.94]; P =0.019). Cerebral infarction or urgent carotid revascularization following transient ischemic attack was reduced by 27% ( P =0.046). Cerebral infarction or intracranial hemorrhage was reduced by 28% ( P =0.023). The primary outcome or intracranial hemorrhage was reduced by 25% ( P =0.021). Intracranial hemorrhages occurred in 13 and 11 patients, respectively (HR, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.53–2.62]; P =0.70). Conclusions— After an ischemic stroke of documented atherosclerotic origin, targeting a LDL cholesterol of <70 mg/dL during 5.3 years avoided 1 subsequent major vascular event in 4 (number needed to treat of 30) and no increase in intracranial hemorrhage. Registration— URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01252875.

Background: Patients with primary progressive aphasia (PPA) usually develop significant behavioral disturbances with progression of the disease. We tested our clinical observation that development of disruptive agitation is more likely in semantic than in nonfluent PPA and examined which clinical variables could be associated with this behavior. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed neuropsychiatric scores and the need for behavioral treatments in semantic PPA (n = 41) and nonfluent PPA (n = 39) cases and compared first (1-3 years since the onset of symptoms) and last (5-13 years since the onset) evaluations. Clinical variables and laterality of temporal atrophy were associated with symptoms in semantic PPA cases. Results: The semantic PPA group developed more frequent (p = 0.03) and intense agitation (p = 0.0008) and had a greater need for antipsychotic drugs (p = 0.001) than the nonfluent PPA group. Presence of agitation was clearly associated with psychotic symptoms (delusions/hallucinations) but was not associated with gender, age at onset, duration of the disease, or laterality of temporal atrophy. In contrast, nonfluent PPA cases were more frequently depressed and treated with antidepressants (p = 0.0007). There were no differences in anxiety, irritability, apathy, perseverations, hyperorality, or abnormal motor behavior. Conclusions: Semantic PPA in advanced disease is frequently associated with agitation and psychotic symptoms with fewer mood symptoms, while nonfluent PPA maintains a high prevalence of depression. This implies different treatment and care and support needs for each group.

Background and purpose:The experience gained during the first COVID-19 wave could have mitigated the negative impact on stroke care in the following waves. Our aims were to analyze the characteristics and outcomes of patients with stroke admitted during the second COVID-19 wave and to evaluate the differences in the stroke care provision compared with the first wave. Methods: This retrospective multicenter cohort study included consecutive stroke patients admitted to any of the seven hospitals with stroke units (SUs) and endovascular treatment facilities in the Madrid Health Region. The characteristics of the stroke patients with or without a COVID-19 diagnosis were compared and the organizational changes in stroke care between the first wave (25 February to 25 April 2020) and second wave (21 July to 21 November 2020) were analyzed.Results: A total of 550 and 1191 stroke patients were admitted during the first and second COVID-19 waves, respectively, with an average daily admission rate of nine patients in both waves. During the second wave, there was a decrease in stroke severity (median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale 5 vs. 6; p = 0.000), in-hospital strokes (3% vs. 8.1%) and in-hospital mortality (9.9% vs. 15.9%). Furthermore, fewer patients experienced concurrent , and they presented milder COVID-19 and less severe strokes. Fewer hospitals reported a reduction in the number of SU beds or deployment of SU personnel to COVID-19 dedicated wards during the second wave. Conclusions:During the second COVID-19 wave, fewer stroke patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, and they had less stroke severity and milder COVID-19.