ObjectiveTo investigate the aetiology, subsequent preventive strategies and outcomes of stroke despite anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).MethodsWe analysed consecutive patients with AF with an index imaging-proven ischaemic stroke despite vitamin K-antagonist (VKA) or direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) treatment across 11 stroke centres. We classified stroke aetiology as: (i) competing stroke mechanism other than AF-related cardioembolism; (ii) insufficient anticoagulation (non-adherence or low anticoagulant activity measured with drug-specific assays); or, (iii) AF-related cardioembolism despite sufficient anticoagulation. We investigated subsequent preventive strategies with regard to the primary (composite of recurrent ischaemic stroke, intracranial haemorrhage, death) and secondary endpoint (recurrent ischaemic stroke) within 3 months after index stroke.ResultsAmong 2946 patients (median age 81 years; 48% women; 43% VKA, 57% DOAC), stroke aetiology was competing mechanism in 713 patients (24%), insufficient anticoagulation in 934 (32%) and cardioembolism despite sufficient anticoagulation in 1299 (44%). We found high rates of the primary (27% of patients; completeness 91.6%) and secondary endpoint (4.6%; completeness 88.5%). Only DOAC (vs VKA) treatment after index stroke showed lower odds for both endpoints (primary: adjusted OR (aOR) (95% CI) 0.49 (0.32 to 0.73); secondary: 0.44 (0.24 to 0.80)), but not switching between different DOAC types. Adding antiplatelets showed higher odds for both endpoints (primary: aOR (95% CI) 1.99 (1.25 to 3.15); secondary: 2.66 (1.40 to 5.04)). Only few patients (1%) received left atrial appendage occlusion as additional preventive strategy.ConclusionsStroke despite anticoagulation comprises heterogeneous aetiologies and cardioembolism despite sufficient anticoagulation is most common. While DOAC were associated with better outcomes than VKA, adding antiplatelets was linked to worse outcomes in these high-risk patients. Our findings indicate that individualised and novel preventive strategies beyond the currently available anticoagulants are needed.Trial registration numberISRCTN48292829.

ImportanceInternational guidelines recommend avoiding intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in patients with ischemic stroke who have a recent intake of a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC).ObjectiveTo determine the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) associated with use of IVT in patients with recent DOAC ingestion.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study included 64 primary and comprehensive stroke centers across Europe, Asia, Australia, and New Zealand. Consecutive adult patients with ischemic stroke who received IVT (both with and without thrombectomy) were included. Patients whose last known DOAC ingestion was more than 48 hours before stroke onset were excluded. A total of 832 patients with recent DOAC use were compared with 32 375 controls without recent DOAC use. Data were collected from January 2008 to December 2021.ExposuresPrior DOAC therapy (confirmed last ingestion within 48 hours prior to IVT) compared with no prior oral anticoagulation.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe main outcome was sICH within 36 hours after IVT, defined as worsening of at least 4 points on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and attributed to radiologically evident intracranial hemorrhage. Outcomes were compared according to different selection strategies (DOAC-level measurements, DOAC reversal treatment, IVT with neither DOAC-level measurement nor idarucizumab). The association of sICH with DOAC plasma levels and very recent ingestions was explored in sensitivity analyses.ResultsOf 33 207 included patients, 14 458 (43.5%) were female, and the median (IQR) age was 73 (62-80) years. The median (IQR) National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 9 (5-16). Of the 832 patients taking DOAC, 252 (30.3%) received DOAC reversal before IVT (all idarucizumab), 225 (27.0%) had DOAC-level measurements, and 355 (42.7%) received IVT without measuring DOAC plasma levels or reversal treatment. The unadjusted rate of sICH was 2.5% (95% CI, 1.6-3.8) in patients taking DOACs compared with 4.1% (95% CI, 3.9-4.4) in control patients using no anticoagulants. Recent DOAC ingestion was associated with lower odds of sICH after IVT compared with no anticoagulation (adjusted odds ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.36-0.92). This finding was consistent among the different selection strategies and in sensitivity analyses of patients with detectable plasma levels or very recent ingestion.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, there was insufficient evidence of excess harm associated with off-label IVT in selected patients after ischemic stroke with recent DOAC ingestion.

A correlation between TPO-Ab-titers and outcome has not been reported previously and challenges the notion of a mere bystander role of TPO-Abs in SREAT.

Background: Current guidelines recommend measurement of troponin in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients. In AIS patients, troponin elevation is associated with increased mortality and worse outcome. However, uncertainty remains regarding the underlying pathophysiology of troponin elevation after stroke, particularly regarding diagnostic and therapeutic consequences. Troponin elevation may be caused by coronary artery disease (CAD) and more precisely acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Both have a high prevalence in stroke patients and contribute to poor outcome. Therefore, better diagnostic algorithms are needed to identify those AIS patients likely to have ACS or other manifestations of CAD. Methods/design: The primary goal of the "PRediction of Acute coronary syndrome in acute Ischemic StrokE" (PRAISE) study is to develop a diagnostic algorithm for prediction of ACS in AIS patients. The primary hypothesis will test whether dynamic high-sensitivity troponin levels determined by repeat measurements (i.e., "rise or fall-pattern") indicate presence of ACS when compared to stable (chronic) troponin elevation. PRAISE is a prospective, multicenter, observational trial with central reading and predefined endpoints guided by a steering committee. Clinical symptoms, troponin levels as well as findings on electrocardiogram, echocardiogram, and coronary angiogram will be recorded and assessed by central academic core laboratories. Diagnosis of ACS will be made by an endpoint adjudication committee. Severe adverse events will be evaluated by a critical event committee. Safety will be judged by a data and safety monitoring board. Follow-up will be conducted at three and twelve months and will record new vascular events (i.e., stroke and myocardial infarction) as well as death, functional and cognitive status. According to sample size calculation, 251 patients have to be included.