Anticoagulants for preventing recurrence following presumed non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack

Cerebrolysin for acute ischaemic stroke

BACKGROUND

Cerebrolysin is a mixture of low-molecular-weight peptides and amino acids derived from porcine brain, which has potential neuroprotective properties. It is widely used in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke in Russia, Eastern Europe, China, and other Asian and post-Soviet countries. This is an update of a review first published in 2010 and last updated in 2020.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of Cerebrolysin or Cerebrolysin-like agents for treating acute ischaemic stroke.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, with Science Citation Index, and LILACS in May 2022 and a number of Russian databases in June 2022. We also searched reference lists, ongoing trials registers, and conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Cerebrolysin or Cerebrolysin-like agents started within 48 hours of stroke onset and continued for any length of time, with placebo or no treatment in people with acute ischaemic stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality and risk of bias, extracted data, and applied GRADE criteria to the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven RCTs (1773 participants) met the inclusion criteria of the review. In this update we added one RCT of Cerebrolysin-like agent Cortexin, which contributed 272 participants. We used the same approach for risk of bias assessment that was re-evaluated for the previous update: we added consideration of the public availability of study protocols and reported outcomes to the selective outcome reporting judgement, through identification, examination, and evaluation of study protocols. For the Cerebrolysin studies, we judged the risk of bias for selective outcome reporting to be unclear across all studies; for blinding of participants and personnel to be low in three studies and unclear in the remaining four; and for blinding of outcome assessors to be low in three studies and unclear in four studies. We judged the risk of bias for generation of allocation sequence to be low in one study and unclear in the remaining six studies; for allocation concealment to be low in one study and unclear in six studies; and for incomplete outcome data to be low in three studies and high in the remaining four studies. The manufacturer of Cerebrolysin supported three multicentre studies, either totally, or by providing Cerebrolysin and placebo, randomisation codes, research grants, or statisticians. We judged two studies to be at high risk of other bias and the remaining five studies to be at unclear risk of other bias. We judged the study of Cortexin to be at low risk of bias for incomplete outcome data and at unclear risk of bias for all other domains. All-cause death: Cerebrolysin or Cortexin probably result in little to no difference in all-cause death (risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.41; 6 trials, 1689 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). None of the included studies reported on poor functional outcome, defined as death or dependence at the end of the follow-up period, early death (within two weeks of stroke onset), quality of life, or time to restoration of capacity for work. Only one study clearly reported on the cause of death: cerebral infarct (four in the Cerebrolysin and two in the placebo group), heart failure (two in the Cerebrolysin and one in the placebo group), pulmonary embolism (two in the placebo group), and pneumonia (one in the placebo group). Non-death attrition (secondary outcome): Cerebrolysin or similar peptide mixtures may result in little to no difference in non-death attrition, but the evidence is very uncertain, with a considerable level of heterogeneity (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.39; 6 trials, 1689 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events (SAEs): Cerebrolysin probably results in little to no difference in the total number of people with SAEs (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.66; 3 trials, 1335 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This comprised fatal SAEs (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.38; 3 trials, 1335 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and an increase in the total number of people with non-fatal SAEs (RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.10 to 5.23; 3 trials, 1335 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). In the subgroup of dosing schedule 30 mL for 10 days (cumulative dose 300 mL), the increase was more prominent (RR 2.87, 95% CI 1.24 to 6.69; 2 trials, 1189 participants). Total number of people with adverse events: Cerebrolysin or similar peptide mixtures may result in little to no difference in the total number of people with adverse events (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.14; 4 trials, 1607 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-certainty evidence indicates that Cerebrolysin or Cerebrolysin-like peptide mixtures derived from cattle brain probably have no beneficial effect on preventing all-cause death in acute ischaemic stroke. Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that Cerebrolysin probably has no beneficial effect on the total number of people with serious adverse events. Moderate-certainty evidence also indicates a potential increase in non-fatal serious adverse events with Cerebrolysin use.

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists for preventing recurrent stroke and other vascular events in people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack

BACKGROUND

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ) agonists are insulin-sensitising drugs used for the treatment of insulin resistance. In addition to lowering glucose in diabetes, these drugs may also protect against hyperlipidaemia and arteriosclerosis, which are risk factors for stroke. This is an update of a review first published in January 2014 and subsequently updated in December 2017 and October 2019.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events for people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (1 January 2022), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2021, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1949 to 1 January 2022), Embase (1980 to 1 January 2022), CINAHL (1982 to 1 January 2022), AMED (1985 to 1 January 2022), and 11 Chinese databases (1 January 2022). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists, and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. We did not impose any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PPAR-γ agonists versus placebo for the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA, with the outcomes of recurrent stroke, vascular events, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted eligible data, cross-checked the data for accuracy, and assessed methodological quality and risk of bias. We evaluated the certainty of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five RCTs with 5039 participants; two studies had a low risk of bias for all domains. Four studies evaluated the drug pioglitazone, and one study evaluated rosiglitazone. The participants in different studies were heterogeneous. Recurrent stroke Three studies evaluated the number of participants with recurrent stroke (4979 participants, a single study contributing 3876 of these). Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists probably reduce the recurrence of stroke compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.99; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events Evidence that adverse events occurred more frequently in participants treated with PPAR-γ agonists when compared with placebo was uncertain due to wide confidence intervals and high levels of statistical heterogeneity: risk difference 10%, 95% CI -8% to 28%; low-certainty evidence). Data were available on additional composite outcomes reflecting serious vascular events (all-cause death and other major vascular events; all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke) from one study in 984 people. This study provided low-certainty evidence that PPAR-γ agonists led to fewer events (data not meta-analysed). Vascular events Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists given over a mean duration of 34.5 months in a single trial of 984 participants may reduce serious vascular events expressed as a composite outcome of total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.99; low-certainty evidence). Other outcomes One study in 20 people measured insulin sensitivity, and one study in 40 people measured the ubiquitin-proteasome activity in carotid plaques. Our confidence in the improvements observed with PPAR-γ agonists were limited by small sample sizes and risk of bias. None of the studies reported the number of participants with disability due to vascular events or improvement in quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists probably reduce recurrent stroke and total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke, and may improve insulin sensitivity and the stabilisation of carotid plaques. Their effects on adverse events are uncertain. Our conclusions should be interpreted with caution considering the small number and the quality of the included studies. Further well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA.

Embolic infarct topology differs between atrial fibrillation subtypes and embolic stroke of undetermined source

BACKGROUND

The lack of superiority of anticoagulation over antiplatelet therapy in embolic stroke of undetermined source (ESUS) may be in part due to the misclassification of radiographic ESUS patterns as cardioembolic. In this imaging analysis, we sought to differentiate clinical and radiographic patterns of ESUS patients from patterns in patients with a highly probable cardioembolic source.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A prospective registry of consecutive adults with acute infarction on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging was queried. Patients with infarctions due to small vessel disease, large vessel disease, and other causes were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of two potentially embolic patterns: (1) multifocal and (2) cortical lesions, comparing patients with ESUS against those with atrial fibrillation (AF).

RESULTS

Among 1243 screened patients, 343 (27.6%) experienced strokes due to ESUS or AF. Prior to the index stroke, patients with AF as compared to ESUS were older (median 75 vs. 65, p<0.01) and had more heart failure (25.9% vs. 8.4%, p<0.01). The odds of multifocal infarction were the same between patients with ESUS and both AF subtypes (p>0.05), however, cortical involvement was more associated with both AF versus ESUS (77.7% vs. 65.7%, P=0.02). A higher Fazekas grade of white matter disease was inversely associated with cortical infarction among included patients (aOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62-0.96).

CONCLUSION

Cortical infarctions were twice as common among patients with AF versus ESUS. Subcortical infarct topography was strongly associated with chronic microvascular ischemic changes and therefore may not represent embolic phenomena. Larger-scale investigations are warranted to discern whether large or multifocal subcortical infarcts ought to be excluded from the ESUS designation.

Comparison of the Warfarin Dosing and Outcomes in Hmong Versus East Asians Patients: Real-World Data From an Integrated Healthcare System

Background

Previous research predicted that Hmong, an understudied East Asian subpopulation, might require significantly lower warfarin doses than East Asian patients partially due to their unique genetic and clinical factors. However, such findings have not been corroborated using real-world data.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of Hmong and East Asian patients receiving warfarin. Warfarin stable doses (WSD) and time to the composite outcome, including international normalized ratio (INR) greater than four incidences or major bleeding within six months of warfarin initiation, were compared.

Results

This cohort study included 55 Hmong and 100 East Asian patients. Compared to East Asian patients, Hmong had a lower mean WSD (14.5 vs. 20.4 mg/week, p<0.05). In addition, Hmong had a 3.1-fold (95% CI: 1.1-9.3, p<0.05) higher hazard of the composite outcome.

Conclusion

Using real-world data, significant differences in warfarin dosing and hazard for the composite outcome of INR>4 and major bleeding were observed between Hmong and East Asian patients. These observations further underscore the importance of recognizing subpopulation-based differences in warfarin dosing and outcomes.

Drugs in secondary stroke prevention

After an ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack, patients have a high risk of having another stroke. Secondary stroke prevention includes antiplatelet therapy, statins and antihypertensives

Aspirin, clopidogrel, or a combination of aspirin with dipyridamole are first-line options for secondary stroke prevention in the absence of atrial fibrillation

Dual antiplatelet therapy has a benefit in the first three weeks after stroke, but patients should change to a single antiplatelet drug after this time

Anticoagulants are indicated if the patient has atrial fibrillation. Avoid combinations of anticoagulants and antiplatelet drugs

Patients should be started on statins after an ischaemic stroke. High doses are recommended even if cholesterol concentrations are normal

Antihypertensive drugs are recommended for all patients with systolic blood pressures greater than 140/90 mmHg. ACE inhibitors, calcium channel blockers and diuretics are first-line options

Neurologic complications of nonrheumatic valvular heart disease

Valvular heart disease (VHD) is frequently associated with neurologic complications. Cerebral embolism is the most common, since thrombus formation results from the abnormalities in the valvular surfaces and the anatomic and physiologic changes associated with valve dysfunction, including atrial or ventricular enlargement, intracardiac thrombi, and cardiac dysrhythmias. Prosthetic heart valves, particularly mechanical valves, are very thrombogenic, which explains the high risk of thromboembolism and the need for long-term anticoagulation. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a nonoperative alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement for patients with intermediate or high surgical risk, and the procedure also has a risk of cerebral ischemia. In addition, anticoagulation, the mainstay of treatment to prevent cerebral embolism, has known potential for hemorrhagic complications. The emergence of new oral anticoagulants with similar effectiveness to warfarin and a better safety profile has facilitated the management of patients with atrial fibrillation. However, their application in patients with mechanical heart valves is still evolving. The prevention and management of these complications requires an understanding of their natural history to balance the risks posed by valvular heart disease, as well as the risks and benefits associated with the treatment.

Cerebrolysin for acute ischaemic stroke

BACKGROUND

Cerebrolysin is a mixture of low-molecular-weight peptides and amino acids derived from porcine brain that has potential neuroprotective properties. It is widely used in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke in Russia, Eastern Europe, China, and other Asian and post-Soviet countries. This is an update of a review first published in 2010 and last updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of Cerebrolysin for treating acute ischaemic stroke.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, with Science Citation Index, LILACS, OpenGrey, and a number of Russian databases in October 2019. We also searched reference lists, ongoing trials registers, and conference proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Cerebrolysin, started within 48 hours of stroke onset and continued for any length of time, with placebo or no treatment in people with acute ischaemic stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality and risk of bias, extracted data, and applied GRADE criteria to the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven RCTs (1601 participants) met the inclusion criteria of the review. In this update we re-evaluated risk of bias through identification, examination, and evaluation of study protocols and judged it to be low, unclear, or high across studies: unclear for all domains in one study, and unclear for selective outcome reporting across all studies; low for blinding of participants and personnel in four studies and unclear in the remaining three; low for blinding of outcome assessors in three studies and unclear in four studies. We judged risk of bias to be low in two studies and unclear in the remaining five studies for generation of allocation sequence; low in one study and unclear in six studies for allocation concealment; and low in one study, unclear in one study, and high in the remaining five studies for incomplete outcome data. The manufacturer of Cerebrolysin supported four multicentre studies, either totally, or by providing Cerebrolysin and placebo, randomisation codes, research grants, or statisticians. We judged three studies to be at high risk of other bias and the remaining four studies to be at unclear risk of other bias. All-cause death: we extracted data from six trials (1517 participants). Cerebrolysin probably results in little to no difference in all-cause death: risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.32 (6 trials, 1517 participants, moderate-quality evidence). None of the included trials reported on poor functional outcome defined as death or dependence at the end of the follow-up period or early death (within two weeks of stroke onset), or time to restoration of capacity for work and quality of life. Only one trial clearly reported on the cause of death: cerebral infarct (four in the Cerebrolysin and two in the placebo group), heart failure (two in the Cerebrolysin and one in the placebo group), pulmonary embolism (two in the placebo group), and pneumonia (one in the placebo group). Serious adverse events (SAEs): Cerebrolysin probably results in little to no difference in the total number of people with SAEs (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.65, 4 RCTs, 1435 participants, moderate-quality evidence). This comprised fatal SAEs (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.38) and an increase in the total number of people with non-fatal SAEs (RR 2.15, 95% CI 1.01 to 4.55, P = 0.047, 4 trials, 1435 participants, moderate-quality evidence). In the subgroup of dosing schedule 30 mL for 10 days (cumulative dose 300 mL), the increase was more prominent: RR 2.86, 95% CI 1.23 to 6.66, P = 0.01 (2 trials, 1189 participants). Total number of people with adverse events: four trials reported on this outcome. Cerebrolysin may result in little to no difference in the total number of people with adverse events: RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.10, P = 0.90, 4 trials, 1435 participants, low-quality evidence. Non-death attrition: evidence from six trials involving 1517 participants suggests that Cerebrolysin results in little to no difference in non-death attrition, with 96 out of 764 Cerebrolysin-treated participants and 117 out of 753 placebo-treated participants being lost to follow-up for reasons other than death (very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence indicates that Cerebrolysin probably has little or no beneficial effect on preventing all-cause death in acute ischaemic stroke, or on the total number of people with serious adverse events. Moderate-quality evidence also indicates a potential increase in non-fatal serious adverse events with Cerebrolysin use.

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists for preventing recurrent stroke and other vascular events in people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack

BACKGROUND

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ) agonists are insulin-sensitising drugs used for the treatment of insulin resistance. In addition to lowering glucose in diabetes, these drugs may also protect against hyperlipidaemia and arteriosclerosis, which are risk factors for stroke. This is an update of a review first published in January 2014 and subsequently updated in December 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events for people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (30 July 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 7), MEDLINE (1949 to 30 July 2019), Embase (1980 to 30 July 2019), CINAHL (1982 to 30 July 2019), AMED (1985 to 30 July 2019), and 11 Chinese databases (30 July 2019). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists, and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. We did not impose any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PPAR-γ agonists versus placebo for the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA, with the outcomes of recurrent stroke, vascular events, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted eligible data, cross-checked the data for accuracy, and assessed methodological quality and risk of bias. We evaluated the quality of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five RCTs with 5039 participants; two studies had a low risk of bias for all domains. Four studies evaluated the drug pioglitazone, and one study evaluated rosiglitazone. The participants in different studies were heterogeneous.Recurrent strokeThree studies evaluated the number of participants with recurrent stroke (4979 participants, a single study contributing 3876 of these). Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists probably reduce the recurrence of stroke compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.99; moderate-quality evidence).Adverse eventsEvidence that adverse events occurred more frequently in participants treated with PPAR-γ agonists when compared with placebo was uncertain due to wide confidence interval and high levels of statistical heterogeneity: risk difference 10%, 95% CI -8% to 28%; low-quality evidence).Data were available on additional composite outcomes reflecting serious vascular events (all-cause death and other major vascular events; all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke) from one study in 984 people. This study provided low-quality evidence that PPAR-γ agonists led to fewer events (data not meta-analysed).Vascular eventsPeroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists given over a mean duration of 34.5 months in a single trial of 984 participants may reduce serious vascular events expressed as a composite outcome of total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.99; low-quality evidence).Other outcomesOne study in 20 people measured insulin sensitivity, and one study in 40 people measured the ubiquitin-proteasome activity in carotid plaques. Our confidence in the improvements observed with PPAR-γ agonists were limited by small sample sizes and risk of bias. None of the studies reported the number of participants with disability due to vascular events or improvement in quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists probably reduce recurrent stroke and total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke, and may improve insulin sensitivity and the stabilisation of carotid plaques. Their effects on adverse events are uncertain. Our conclusions should be interpreted with caution considering the small number and the quality of the included studies. Further well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA.

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists for preventing recurrent stroke and other vascular events in people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack

BACKGROUND

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ) agonists are insulin-sensitising drugs used for the treatment of insulin resistance. In addition to lowering glucose in diabetes, these drugs may also protect against hyperlipidaemia and arteriosclerosis, which are risk factors for stroke. This is an update of a review first published in January 2014 and subsequently updated in October 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events for people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (16 May 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1949 to 16 May 2017), Embase (1980 to 16 May 2017), CINAHL (1982 to 16 May 2017), AMED (1985 to 16 May 2017), and 11 Chinese databases (16 May 2017). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists, and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. We did not impose any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PPAR-γ agonists versus placebo for the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA, with the outcomes of recurrent stroke, vascular events, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted eligible data, cross-checked the data for accuracy, and assessed methodological quality and risk of bias. We evaluated the quality of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five RCTs with 5039 participants; two studies had a low risk of bias for all domains. Four studies evaluated the drug pioglitazone, and one study evaluated rosiglitazone. The participants in different studies were heterogeneous.Recurrent strokeThree studies evaluated the number of participants with recurrent stroke (4979 participants, a single study contributing 3876 of these). Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists probably reduce the recurrence of stroke compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.99; moderate-quality evidence).Adverse eventsEvidence that adverse events occurred more frequently in participants treated with PPAR-γ agonists when compared with placebo was uncertain due to wide confidence interval and high levels of statistical heterogeneity: risk difference 10%, 95% CI -8% to 28%; low-quality evidence).Data were available on additional composite outcomes reflecting serious vascular events (all-cause death and other major vascular events; all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke) from one study in 984 people. This study provided low-quality evidence that PPAR-γ agonists led to fewer events (data not meta-analysed).Vascular eventsPeroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists given over a mean duration of 34.5 months in a single trial of 984 participants may reduce serious vascular events expressed as a composite outcome of total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.99; low-quality evidence).Other outcomesOne study in 20 people measured insulin sensitivity, and one study in 40 people measured the ubiquitin-proteasome activity in carotid plaques. Our confidence in the improvements observed with PPAR-γ agonists were limited by small sample sizes and risk of bias. None of the studies reported the number of participants with disability due to vascular events or improvement in quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists probably reduce recurrent stroke and total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke, and may improve insulin sensitivity and the stabilisation of carotid plaques. Their effects on adverse events are uncertain. Our conclusions should be interpreted with caution considering the small number and the quality of the included studies. Further well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA.

Cerebrolysin for acute ischaemic stroke

BACKGROUND

Cerebrolysin is a mixture of low-molecular-weight peptides and amino acids derived from pigs' brain tissue, which has potential neuroprotective and neurotrophic properties. It is widely used in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke in Russia, Eastern Europe, China, and other Asian and post-Soviet countries.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and risks of cerebrolysin for treating acute ischaemic stroke.

SEARCH METHODS

In May 2016 we searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, with Science Citation Index, LILACS, OpenGrey, and a number of Russian Databases. We also searched reference lists, ongoing trials registers and conference proceedings, and contacted the manufacturer of cerebrolysin, EVER Neuro Pharma GmbH (formerly Ebewe Pharma).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing cerebrolysin, started within 48 hours of stroke onset and continued for any time, with placebo or no treatment in people with acute ischaemic stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality and risk of bias, and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six RCTs (1501 participants) that met the inclusion criteria.We evaluated risk of bias and judged it to be unclear for generation of allocation sequence in four studies and low in two studies; unclear for allocation concealment in five studies and low in one study; high for incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) in five studies and unclear in one study; unclear for blinding; high for selective reporting in four studies and unclear in two; and high for other sources of bias in three studies and unclear in the rest. The manufacturer of cerebrolysin, pharmaceutical company EVER Neuro Pharma, supported three multi-centre studies, either totally, or providing cerebrolysin and placebo, randomisation codes, research grants, or statisticians.None of the included trials reported on poor functional outcome defined as death or dependence at the end of the follow-up period or early death (within two weeks of stroke onset).All-cause death: we extracted data from five trials (1417 participants). There was no difference in the number of deaths: 46/714 in cerebrolysin group versus 47/703 in placebo group; risk ratio (RR) 0.91 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.35 (5 trials, 1417 participants, moderate-quality evidence).Serious adverse events (SAEs): there was no significant difference in the total number of SAEs with cerebrolysin (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.67). This comprised no difference in fatal SAEs (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.38) and an increase in the number of people with non-fatal SAEs (20/667 with cerebrolysin and 8/668 with placebo: RR 2.47, 95% CI 1.09 to 5.58, P = 0.03) (3 trials, 1335 participants, moderate-quality evidence).Total number of people with adverse events: three trials reported on this. There was no difference in the total number of people with adverse events: 308/667 in cerebrolysin group versus 307/668 in placebo group; RR 0.97 95% CI 0.86 to 1.09, random-effects model (3 trials, 1335 participants, moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this Cochrane Review do not demonstrate clinical benefits of cerebrolysin for treating acute ischaemic stroke. We found moderate-quality evidence of an increase in non-fatal SAEs with cerebrolysin use but not in total SAEs.

Cerebrolysin for acute ischaemic stroke

BACKGROUND

Cerebrolysin is a mixture of low-molecular-weight peptides and amino acids derived from pigs' brain tissue, which has potential neuroprotective and neurotrophic properties. It is widely used in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke in Russia, Eastern Europe, China, and other Asian and post-Soviet countries.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and risks of cerebrolysin for treating acute ischaemic stroke.

SEARCH METHODS

In May 2016 we searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, with Science Citation Index, LILACS, OpenGrey, and a number of Russian Databases. We also searched reference lists, ongoing trials registers and conference proceedings, and contacted the manufacturer of cerebrolysin, EVER Neuro Pharma GmbH (formerly Ebewe Pharma).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing cerebrolysin, started within 48 hours of stroke onset and continued for any time, with placebo or no treatment in people with acute ischaemic stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality and risk of bias, and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six RCTs (1501 participants) that met the inclusion criteria.We evaluated risk of bias and judged it to be unclear for generation of allocation sequence in four studies and low in two studies; unclear for allocation concealment in five studies and low in one study; high for incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) in five studies and unclear in one study; unclear for blinding; high for selective reporting in four studies and unclear in two; and high for other sources of bias in three studies and unclear in the rest. The manufacturer of cerebrolysin, pharmaceutical company EVER Neuro Pharma, supported three multi-centre studies, either totally, or providing cerebrolysin and placebo, randomisation codes, research grants, or statisticians.None of the included trials reported on poor functional outcome defined as death or dependence at the end of the follow-up period or early death (within two weeks of stroke onset).All-cause death: we extracted data from five trials (1417 participants). There was no difference in the number of deaths: 46/714 in cerebrolysin group versus 47/703 in placebo group; risk ratio (RR) 0.91 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.35 (5 trials, 1417 participants, moderate-quality evidence).Serious adverse events: two trials reported on this outcome, with 90% confidence cerebrolysin increased the risks of serious adverse events by at least one third compared to placebo: 62/589 in cerebrolysin group versus 46/600 in placebo group; RR 1.37 90% CI 1.01 to 1.86 (2 trials, 1189 participants, moderate-quality evidence).Total number of people with adverse events: three trials reported on this. There was no difference in the total number of people with adverse events: 308/667 in cerebrolysin group versus 307/668 in placebo group; RR 0.97 95% CI 0.86 to 1.09, random-effects model (3 trials, 1335 participants, moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this Cochrane Review do not demonstrate clinical benefits of cerebrolysin for treating acute ischaemic stroke. We found moderate-quality evidence suggesting that serious adverse events may be more common with cerebrolysin use in acute ischaemic stroke.

Use of Heparin in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Is There Still a Role?

Heparin has long been a contested therapy in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). In current practice, heparin is considered on a case-by-case basis, but there is no consensus as to the appropriate timing of anticoagulation or for which ischemic stroke subtypes heparin may be beneficial. To provide better clarity on this issue, we review current research focusing on the use of heparin in AIS in each stroke subtype and subsequently make recommendations to provide readers with a systematic approach to managing complex stroke patients for which acute anticoagulation may be valuable. We conclude that there are certain subpopulations of ischemic stroke patients that may derive benefit from heparin when given acutely, including patients with symptomatic large artery stenosis >70 %, non-occlusive intraluminal thrombus, and in patients with high-risk cardiac conditions including left ventricular thrombus, left ventricular assist devices, and mechanical heart valves.

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists for preventing recurrent stroke and other vascular events in patients with stroke or transient ischaemic attack

BACKGROUND

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ) agonists are insulin-sensitising drugs used for the treatment of insulin resistance. In addition to lowering glucose in diabetes, these drugs may also protect against hyperlipidaemia and arteriosclerosis, which are risk factors for stroke.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events for people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (July 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1949 to July 2015), EMBASE (1980 to July 2015), CINAHL (1982 to July 2015), AMED (1985 to July 2015) and 11 Chinese databases (July 2015). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. We did not impose any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PPAR-γ agonists versus placebo for the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA, with the outcomes of recurrent stroke, vascular events and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted eligible data, cross-checked the data for accuracy, and assessed methodological quality and risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four eligible studies with 1163 participants; only one study had a low risk of bias for all domains. Three studies evaluated the drug pioglitazone and one study evaluated rosiglitazone. The participants in different studies were heterogeneous. The number of participants with recurrent stroke was evaluated in two studies, where PPAR-γ agonists reduced the recurrence of stroke compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 0.80). PPAR-γ agonists given over a mean duration of 34.5 months in a single trial were found to reduce a composite outcome of total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.99). Data on additional composite outcomes reflecting serious adverse events (all-cause death and other major vascular events; all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke) were similar although the confidence intervals were wider and the effects were not statistically significant. In addition, two studies respectively measured insulin sensitivity and the ubiquitin-proteasome activity in carotid plaques. These results were significantly improved by PPAR-γ agonists in comparison with placebo. None of the studies reported the number of participants with disability due to vascular events or improvement in quality of life. Three RCTs reported information about adverse events. Frequent adverse events included oedema, cardiac failure and anaemia. Evidence that adverse events occurred more frequently in participants treated with PPAR-γ agonists when compared with placebo was imprecise and inconsistent (risk difference (RD) 10%, 95% CI -8% to 28%, I² = 86%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PPAR-γ agonists appear to reduce recurrent stroke and total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke, and improve insulin sensitivity and the stabilisation of carotid plaques. There is evidence of limited quality that they are well tolerated. However, the conclusions should be interpreted with caution considering the small number and the quality of the included studies. In future, well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA.

Effect of Heparin on Recanalization in Acute Stroke Patients with Intra-Arterial Thrombi

Anticoagulant use, such as heparin, is usually contraindicated in acute stroke patients. We present a study of patients, who were treated with intravenous heparin after a stroke that were also found to have an intraluminal thrombus. Prior studies imply that recanalization is achieved with heparin; however heparin should only prevent thrombus propagation. Therefore it is unclear whether and how IV heparin can achieve recanalization of intraluminal thrombi in acute stroke patients. A retrospective review of all acute stroke patients from a single stroke center who received a therapeutic IV heparin infusion from 5/2006 to 9/2011 were included in the study. We compared patients who had complete/partial recanalization and/or improved flow versus those that did not, with both these groups on a standard intravenous heparin infusion protocol. Demographic data was compared between the groups. Average partial thromboplastin time (PTT) during heparin infusion, time between computed tomography angiographies (CTAs), time from stroke onset to receiving IV heparin, and vessel occluded were also compared between groups. Forty-one patients (19 female, 22 male) were included in the study with a total of 55 vessels (either carotid, middle cerebral artery, anterior cerebral artery, posterior cerebral artery/posterior circulation) having intraluminal thrombi; 31 patients had 41 vessels with either partial or complete recanalization of effected vessels, while 10 patients had 14 vessels that did not have at least one vessel recanalize while on heparin. Using t-test we noted that the average PTT between the vessels that had partial/complete recanalization group (61.74) and nonrecanalization group (66.30) was not statistical significantly different (P=0.37).The average time in days on heparin between vascular imaging studies (CTA/conventional angiogram) in the group of vessels with partial/complete recanalization (7.12 days) and the ones with no change (6.11 days) was not significantly different between the two groups (P=0.59). Patient's vessels receiving heparin for <24 hours versus those >24 hours did not significantly differ either (P=0.17). This study compares patient characteristics associated with recanalization of intraluminal thrombi in acute stroke patients on heparin. Recanalization of intraluminal thrombi are not associated with average PTT or duration on heparin.

Cerebrolysin for acute ischaemic stroke

BACKGROUND

Cerebrolysin is a mixture of low-molecular-weight peptides and amino acids derived from pigs' brain tissue, which has potential neuroprotective and neurotrophic properties. It is widely used in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke in Russia, China, and other Asian and post-Soviet countries.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and risks of Cerebrolysin for treating acute ischaemic stroke.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (October 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (November 2014), MEDLINE (1966 to November 2014), EMBASE (1974 to November 2014), Web of Science Core Collection, with Science Citation Index (1940 to November 2014), LILACS (1982 to December 2014), OpenGrey (1980 to December 2014), and a number of Russian Databases (1998 to December 2014). We also searched reference lists, ongoing trials registers and conference proceedings, and contacted the manufacturer of Cerebrolysin, EVER Neuro Pharma GmbH (formerly Ebewe Pharma).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing Cerebrolysin started within 48 hours of stroke onset and continued for at least two weeks with placebo or no treatment in people with acute ischaemic stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality and risk of bias, and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one trial involving 146 participants. We evaluated risk of bias and judged it to be high for generation of allocation sequence, low for allocation concealment, high for incomplete outcome data (attrition bias), unclear for blinding, high for selective reporting and high for other sources of bias. The manufacturer of Cerebrolysin, pharmaceutical company Ebewe, provided Cerebrolysin and the placebo, as well as the randomisation codes. There was no difference in the number of deaths (6/78 in Cerebrolysin group versus 6/68 in placebo group; risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 2.58) or in the total number of adverse events (16.4% versus 10.3%; RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.69 to 3.82) between the treatment and control groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Routine administration of Cerebrolysin to people with acute ischaemic stroke cannot be supported by the available evidence from RCTs.

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonists for preventing recurrent stroke and other vascular events in patients with stroke or transient ischaemic attack

BACKGROUND

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ) agonists are insulin-sensitising drugs used for the treatment of insulin resistance. In addition to lowing glucose in diabetes, these drugs may also protect against hyperlipidaemia and arteriosclerosis, which are risk factors for stroke.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events for people with stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (August 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1949 to October 2013), EMBASE (1980 to October 2013), CINAHL (1982 to October 2013), AMED (1985 to October 2013) and 11 Chinese databases (October 2013). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. There were no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PPAR-γ agonists versus placebo for the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA, with the outcomes of recurrent stroke, vascular events and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted eligible data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four eligible studies with 1163 participants; only one study had a low risk of bias for all domains. The participants in different studies were heterogeneous. The number of participants with recurrent stroke was evaluated in two studies, where PPAR-γ agonists reduced the recurrence of stroke compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 0.80). PPAR-γ agonists given over a mean duration of 34.5 months in a single trial were found to reduce a composite outcome of total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.99). Data on additional composite outcomes reflecting serious adverse events (all-cause death and other major vascular events; all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke) were similar although the confidence intervals were wider and the effects were not statistically significant. In addition, two studies respectively measured insulin sensitivity and the ubiquitin-proteasome activity in carotid plaques with significant differences in these outcomes between PPAR-γ agonists and placebo. None of the studies reported the number of participants with disability due to vascular events or improvement in quality of life. Three RCTs reported information about adverse events. Frequent adverse events included oedema, cardiac failure and anaemia. Evidence that adverse events occurred more frequently in participants treated with PPAR-γ agonists when compared with placebo was imprecise and inconsistent (risk difference (RD) 10%, 95% CI -8% to 28%, I² = 86%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PPAR-γ agonists were demonstrated to reduce recurrent stroke and total events of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke, and improve insulin sensitivity and the stabilisation of carotid plaques. There is evidence of limited quality that they are well-tolerated. However, the conclusions should be interpreted with caution considering the small number and the quality of the included studies. In future, well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to test the efficacy and safety of PPAR-γ agonists in the secondary prevention of stroke and related vascular events in people with stroke or TIA.

Neurologic complications of valvular heart disease

Valvular heart disease (VHD) is frequently associated with neurologic complications; cerebral embolism is the most common of these since thrombus formation results from the abnormalities in the valvular surfaces or from the anatomic and physiologic changes associated with valve dysfunction, such as atrial or ventricular enlargement, intracardiac thrombi, and cardiac dysrhythmias. Prosthetic heart valves, particularly mechanical valves, are very thrombogenic, which explains the high risk of thromboembolism and the need for anticoagulation for the prevention of embolism. Infective endocarditis is a disease process with protean manifestations that include not only cerebral embolism but also intracranial hemorrhage, mycotic aneurysms, and systemic manifestations such as fever and encephalopathy. Other neurologic complications include nonbacterial thrombotic endocarditis, a process associated with systemic diseases such as cancer and systemic lupus erythematosus. For many of these conditions, anticoagulation is the mainstay of treatment to prevent cerebral embolism, therefore it is the potential complications of anticoagulation that can explain other neurologic complications in patients with VHD. The prevention and management of these complications requires an understanding of their natural history in order to balance the risks posed by valvular disease itself against the risks and benefits associated with treatment.

Spontaneous coronary thrombosis following thrombolytic therapy for acute cardiovascular accident and stroke: a case study

Cardiac complications following stroke or acute cerebrovascular accidents (CVA) are common; however, many of these complications are asymptomatic and do not cause adverse cardiac effects. Symptomatic events (such as acute myocardial infarction after CVA) rarely occur and are often the result of an underlying cardiac embolic source, such as a left ventricular thrombus. We report a case of spontaneous coronary thrombosis following thrombolytic therapy for acute CVA, and discuss the implication that an underlying systemic pro-thrombotic state may predispose individuals to thrombosis in disparate vascular beds.

Vitamin K antagonists versus antiplatelet therapy after transient ischaemic attack or minor ischaemic stroke of presumed arterial origin

BACKGROUND

People who have had a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or non-disabling ischaemic stroke have an annual risk of major vascular events of between 4% and 11%. Aspirin reduces this risk by 20% at most. Secondary prevention trials after myocardial infarction indicate that treatment with vitamin K antagonists is associated with a risk reduction approximately twice that of treatment with antiplatelet therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of vitamin K antagonists and antiplatelet therapy in the secondary prevention of vascular events after cerebral ischaemia of presumed arterial origin.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 15 September 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 3), MEDLINE (2008 to September 2011) and EMBASE (2008 to September 2011). In an effort to identify further relevant trials we searched ongoing trials registers and reference lists. We also contacted authors of published trials for further information and unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of oral anticoagulant therapy with vitamin K antagonists (warfarin, phenprocoumon or acenocoumarol) versus antiplatelet therapy for long-term secondary prevention after recent transient ischaemic attack or minor ischaemic stroke of presumed arterial origin.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight trials with a total of 5762 participants. The data showed that anticoagulants (in any intensity) are not more efficacious in the prevention of vascular events than antiplatelet therapy (medium intensity anticoagulation: relative risk (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 1.14; high intensity anticoagulation: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.13). There is no evidence that treatment with low intensity anticoagulation gives a higher bleeding risk than treatment with antiplatelet agents: RR 1.27 (95% CI 0.79 to 2.03). However, it was clear that medium and high intensity anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists, with an INR of 2.0 to 4.5, were not safe because they yielded a higher risk of major bleeding complications (medium intensity anticoagulation: RR 1.93, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.94; high intensity anticoagulation: RR 9.0, 95% CI 3.9 to 21).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the secondary prevention of further vascular events after TIA or minor stroke of presumed arterial origin, there is sufficient evidence to conclude that vitamin K antagonists in any dose are not more efficacious than antiplatelet therapy and that medium and high intensity anticoagulation leads to a significant increase in major bleeding complications.