Peter D. Schellinger

BACKGROUND: Cryptogenic strokes constitute 20 to 30% of ischemic strokes, and most cryptogenic strokes are considered to be embolic and of undetermined source. An earlier randomized trial showed that rivaroxaban is no more effective than aspirin in preventing recurrent stroke after a presumed embolic stroke from an undetermined source. Whether dabigatran would be effective in preventing recurrent strokes after this type of stroke was unclear. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial of dabigatran at a dose of 150 mg or 110 mg twice daily as compared with aspirin at a dose of 100 mg once daily in patients who had had an embolic stroke of undetermined source. The primary outcome was recurrent stroke. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 5390 patients were enrolled at 564 sites and were randomly assigned to receive dabigatran (2695 patients) or aspirin (2695 patients). During a median follow-up of 19 months, recurrent strokes occurred in 177 patients (6.6%) in the dabigatran group (4.1% per year) and in 207 patients (7.7%) in the aspirin group (4.8% per year) (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 1.03; P = 0.10). Ischemic strokes occurred in 172 patients (4.0% per year) and 203 patients (4.7% per year), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.03). Major bleeding occurred in 77 patients (1.7% per year) in the dabigatran group and in 64 patients (1.4% per year) in the aspirin group (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.66). Clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 70 patients (1.6% per year) and 41 patients (0.9% per year), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a recent history of embolic stroke of undetermined source, dabigatran was not superior to aspirin in preventing recurrent stroke. The incidence of major bleeding was not greater in the dabigatran group than in the aspirin group, but there were more clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding events in the dabigatran group. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; RE-SPECT ESUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02239120.).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Numerous preclinical findings and a clinical pilot study suggest that recombinant human erythropoietin (EPO) provides neuroprotection that may be beneficial for the treatment of patients with ischemic stroke. Although EPO has been considered to be a safe and well-tolerated drug over 2 decades, recent studies have identified increased thromboembolic complications and/or mortality risks on EPO administration to patients with cancer or chronic kidney disease. Accordingly, the double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized German Multicenter EPO Stroke Trial (Phase II/III; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00604630) was designed to evaluate efficacy and safety of EPO in stroke. METHODS: This clinical trial enrolled 522 patients with acute ischemic stroke in the middle cerebral artery territory (intent-to-treat population) with 460 patients treated as planned (per-protocol population). Within 6 hours of symptom onset, at 24 and 48 hours, EPO was infused intravenously (40,000 IU each). Systemic thrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator was allowed and stratified for. RESULTS: Unexpectedly, a very high number of patients received recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (63.4%). On analysis of total intent-to-treat and per-protocol populations, neither primary outcome Barthel Index on Day 90 (P=0.45) nor any of the other outcome parameters showed favorable effects of EPO. There was an overall death rate of 16.4% (n=42 of 256) in the EPO and 9.0% (n=24 of 266) in the placebo group (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.16 to 3.38; P=0.01) without any particular mechanism of death unexpected after stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Based on analysis of total intent-to-treat and per-protocol populations only, this is a negative trial that also raises safety concerns, particularly in patients receiving systemic thrombolysis.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) has become the cornerstone of acute ischemic stroke management in patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO). OBJECTIVE: To assist physicians in their clinical decisions with regard toMT. METHODS: These guidelines were developed based on the standard operating procedure of the European Stroke Organisation and followed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. An interdisciplinary working group identified 15 relevant questions, performed systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the literature, assessed the quality of the available evidence, and wrote evidence-based recommendations. Expert opinion was provided if not enough evidence was available to provide recommendations based on the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We found high-quality evidence to recommend MT plus best medical management (BMM, including intravenous thrombolysis whenever indicated) to improve functional outcome in patients with LVO-related acute ischemic stroke within 6 hours after symptom onset. We found moderate quality of evidence to recommend MT plus BMM in the 6-24h time window in patients meeting the eligibility criteria of published randomized trials. These guidelinesdetails aspects of prehospital management, patient selection based on clinical and imaging characteristics, and treatment modalities. CONCLUSIONS: MT is the standard of care in patients with LVO-related acute stroke. Appropriate patient selection and timely reperfusion are crucial. Further randomized trials are needed to inform clinical decision-making with regard tothe mothership and drip-and-ship approaches, anesthaesia modalities during MT, and to determine whether MT is beneficial in patients with low stroke severity or large infarct volume.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) has become the cornerstone of acute ischaemic stroke management in patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO). The aim of this guideline document is to assist physicians in their clinical decisions with regard to MT. METHODS: These Guidelines were developed based on the standard operating procedure of the European Stroke Organisation and followed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. An interdisciplinary working group identified 15 relevant questions, performed systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the literature, assessed the quality of the available evidence, and wrote evidence based recommendations. Expert opinion was provided if not enough evidence was available to provide recommendations based on the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We found high quality evidence to recommend MT plus best medical management (BMM, including intravenous thrombolysis whenever indicated) to improve functional outcome in patients with LVO-related acute ischaemic stroke within 6 hours after symptom onset. We found moderate quality of evidence to recommend MT plus BMM in the 6-24h time window in patients meeting the eligibility criteria of published randomized trials. These guidelines further detail aspects of prehospital management, patient selection based on clinical and imaging characteristics, and treatment modalities. CONCLUSIONS: MT is the standard of care in patients with LVO-related acute stroke. Appropriate patient selection and timely reperfusion are crucial. Further randomized trials are needed to inform clinical decision making with regard to the mothership and drip-and-ship approaches, anesthaesia modalities during MT, and to determine whether MT is beneficial in patients with low stroke severity or large infarct volume.

IMPORTANCE: Although use of oral anticoagulants (OACs) is increasing, there is a substantial lack of data on how to treat OAC-associated intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of anticoagulation reversal and blood pressure (BP) with hematoma enlargement and the effects of OAC resumption. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study at 19 German tertiary care centers (2006-2012) including 1176 individuals for analysis of long-term functional outcome, 853 for analysis of hematoma enlargement, and 719 for analysis of OAC resumption. EXPOSURES: Reversal of anticoagulation during acute phase, systolic BP at 4 hours, and reinitiation of OAC for long-term treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Frequency of hematoma enlargement in relation to international normalized ratio (INR) and BP. Incidence analysis of ischemic and hemorrhagic events with or without OAC resumption. Factors associated with favorable (modified Rankin Scale score, 0-3) vs unfavorable functional outcome. RESULTS: Hemorrhage enlargement occurred in 307 of 853 patients (36.0%). Reduced rates of hematoma enlargement were associated with reversal of INR levels <1.3 within 4 hours after admission (43/217 [19.8%]) vs INR of ≥1.3 (264/636 [41.5%]; P < .001) and systolic BP <160 mm Hg at 4 hours (167/504 [33.1%]) vs ≥160 mm Hg (98/187 [52.4%]; P < .001). The combination of INR reversal <1.3 within 4 hours and systolic BP of <160 mm Hg at 4 hours was associated with lower rates of hematoma enlargement (35/193 [18.1%] vs 220/498 [44.2%] not achieving these values; OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19-0.42; P < .001) and lower rates of in-hospital mortality (26/193 [13.5%] vs 103/498 [20.7%]; OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.37-0.95; P = .03). OAC was resumed in 172 of 719 survivors (23.9%). OAC resumption showed fewer ischemic complications (OAC: 9/172 [5.2%] vs no OAC: 82/547 [15.0%]; P < .001) and not significantly different hemorrhagic complications (OAC: 14/172 [8.1%] vs no OAC: 36/547 [6.6%]; P = .48). Propensity-matched survival analysis in patients with atrial fibrillation who restarted OAC showed a decreased HR of 0.258 (95% CI, 0.125-0.534; P < .001) for long-term mortality. Functional long-term outcome was unfavorable in 786 of 1083 patients (72.6%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with OAC-associated ICH, reversal of INR <1.3 within 4 hours and systolic BP <160 mm Hg at 4 hours were associated with lower rates of hematoma enlargement, and resumption of OAC therapy was associated with lower risk of ischemic events. These findings require replication and assessment in prospective studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01829581.