Endovascular stroke treatment does not preclude high thrombolysis rates

Evaluating Thrombolysis Rates and Emergency Department Time Targets in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Need for Personalized Medicine

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In the era of personalized medicine, standard protocols regarding the management of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) focus on time targets alone without tailoring the protocol to the specific patient and hospital characteristics to increase IV thrombolysis rates and improve outcomes for these patients by considering organizational differences and patient-related factors that influence adherence to target times at the emergency department level. With this in mind, we evaluate the effect of achieving ED time targets from standard protocol and patient-related risk factors on the intravenous (IV) thrombolysis rate in patients with AIS in the therapeutic window.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For our research, we enrolled people who arrived at the ED with signs of recent AIS with an onset of less than 4.5 h. Initially, 355 patients were included in the study, but through careful screening, only 258 were considered eligible to participate. Of the final group of 258 patients, only 46 received intravenous thrombolysis treatment.

RESULTS

In our study, when we are analyzing ED times in patients admitted with stroke symptoms in the therapeutic window, we found statistically significantly decreased ED times for patients that performed IV thrombolysis compared to patients not performing as follows: a median of 100 min in onset-to-ED door time (p < 0.001), a door-to-physician time (ED doctor) of 4 min (p = 0.009), door-to-blood-samples of 5 min (p = 0.026), a door-to-CT time of 15.5 min (p = 0.009), and door-to-CT results of 37 min (p < 0.001). In addition, patients who received intravenous thrombolysis were found to be significantly older (p < 0.001), with lower height and weight (p < 0.001 for both) and lower Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores (9 ± 4.94 vs. 13.85 ± 2.41, p < 0.001). The logistic regression analysis indicated that the onset-to-ED time (p < 0.001) and the door-to-physician time (p = 0.014) for emergency medicine physicians are significant predictors of the likelihood of administering thrombolysis. By analyzing the impact of comorbidities, we observed that dyslipidemia, chronic arterial hypertension, and diabetes mellitus are significant predictive factors for performing IV thrombolysis (the presence of dyslipidemia and diabetes mellitus are predictive factors for performing IV thrombolysis, while the presence of arterial hypertension is not).

CONCLUSIONS

The ED time targets that significantly influenced IV thrombolysis in our study were the onset-to-ED door time and the time it takes for the ED doctor to assess the AIS patient (door-to-physician time). The IV thrombolysis rate for these patients was 17.83%, lower than expected despite achieving most ED time targets, with the presence of chronic arterial hypertension as a significant predictive patient-related factor for not performing it. Even though our reported hospital's thrombolysis rate is favorable compared to international reports, there is always room for improvement. Based on our study results, it is necessary that new protocols to customized standard protocols and ED time targets for increasing IV thrombolysis rate in patients with AIS in the therapeutic window, focusing more on patient-related factors and type of hospitals, granting personalized medicine its right. Based on our study results, it is necessary that new protocols customize standard protocols and ED time targets for increasing IV thrombolysis rate in patients with AIS in the therapeutic window, focusing more on patient-related factors and type of hospitals, granting personalized medicine its right.

Neuroinflammation and COVID-19 Ischemic Stroke Recovery—Evolving Evidence for the Mediating Roles of the ACE2/Angiotensin-(1–7)/Mas Receptor Axis and NLRP3 Inflammasome

Cerebrovascular events, notably acute ischemic strokes (AIS), have been reported in the setting of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection. Commonly regarded as cryptogenic, to date, the etiology is thought to be multifactorial and remains obscure; it is linked either to a direct viral invasion or to an indirect virus-induced prothrombotic state, with or without the presence of conventional cerebrovascular risk factors. In addition, patients are at a greater risk of developing long-term negative sequelae, i.e., long-COVID-related neurological problems, when compared to non-COVID-19 stroke patients. Central to the underlying neurobiology of stroke recovery in the context of COVID-19 infection is reduced angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) expression, which is known to lead to thrombo-inflammation and ACE2/angiotensin-(1–7)/mitochondrial assembly receptor (MasR) (ACE2/Ang-(1-7)/MasR) axis inhibition. Moreover, after AIS, the activated nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain (NOD)-like receptor (NLR) family pyrin domain-containing 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome may heighten the production of numerous proinflammatory cytokines, mediating neuro-glial cell dysfunction, ultimately leading to nerve-cell death. Therefore, potential neuroprotective therapies targeting the molecular mechanisms of the aforementioned mediators may help to inform rehabilitation strategies to improve brain reorganization (i.e., neuro-gliogenesis and synaptogenesis) and secondary prevention among AIS patients with or without COVID-19. Therefore, this narrative review aims to evaluate the mediating role of the ACE2/Ang- (1-7)/MasR axis and NLRP3 inflammasome in COVID-19-mediated AIS, as well as the prospects of these neuroinflammation mediators for brain repair and in secondary prevention strategies against AIS in stroke rehabilitation.

StrokeWatch: An Instrument for Objective Standardized Real-Time Measurement of Door-to-Needle Times in Acute Ischemic Stroke Treatment

OBJECTIVES

Monitoring critical time intervals in acute ischemic stroke treatment delivers metrics for quality of performance - the door-to-needle time being well-established. To resolve the conflict of self-reporting bias a "StrokeWatch" was designed - an instrument for objective standardized real-time measurement of procedural times.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An observational, monocentric analysis of patients receiving intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke between January 2018 and September 2019 was performed based on an ongoing investigator-initiated, prospective, and blinded endpoint registry. Patient data and treatment intervals before and after introduction of "StrokeWatch" were compared.

RESULTS

"StrokeWatch" was designed as a mobile board equipped with three digital stopwatches tracking door-to-needle, door-to-groin, and door-to-recanalization intervals as well as a form for standardized documentation. 118 patients before introduction of "StrokeWatch" (subgroup A) and 53 patients after introduction of "StrokeWatch" (subgroup B) were compared. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, procedural times, or clinical outcome. A non-significant increase in patients with door-to-needle intervals of 60 min or faster (93.2 vs 98.1%, p = 0.243) and good functional outcome (mRS d90 ≤ 2, 47.5 vs 58.5%, p = 0.218) as well as a significant increase in reports of delayed arrival of intra-hospital patient transport service (0.8 vs 13.2%, p = 0.001) were observed in subgroup B.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of StrokeWatch for objective standardized real-time measurement of door-to-needle times is feasible in a real-life setting without negative impact on procedural times or outcome. It helped to reassure a high-quality treatment standard and reveal factors associated with procedural delays.

Off-label use of intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a critical appraisal of randomized and real-world evidence

Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) represents the only systemic reperfusion therapy able to reverse neurological deficit in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Despite its effectiveness in patients with or without large vessel occlusion, it can be offered only to a minority of them, because of the short therapeutic window and additional contraindications derived from stringent but arbitrary inclusion and exclusion criteria used in landmark randomized controlled clinical trials. Many absolute or relative contraindications lead to disparities between the official drug label and guidelines or expert recommendations. Based on recent advances in neuroimaging and evidence from cohort studies, off-label use of IVT is increasingly incorporated into the daily practice of many stroke centers. They relate to extension of therapeutic time windows, and expansion of indications in co-existing conditions originally listed in exclusion criteria, such as use of alternative thrombolytic agents, pre-treatment with antiplatelets, anticoagulants or low molecular weight heparins. In this narrative review, we summarize recent randomized and real-world data on the safety and efficacy of off-label use of IVT for AIS. We also make some practical recommendations to stroke physicians regarding the off-label use of thrombolytic agents in complex and uncommon presentations of AIS or other conditions mimicking acute cerebral ischemia. Finally, we provide guidance on the risks and benefits of IVT in numerous AIS subgroups, where equipoise exists and guidelines and treatment practices vary.

Recovery from stroke: current concepts and future perspectives

Stroke is a leading cause of acquired, permanent disability worldwide. Although the treatment of acute stroke has been improved considerably, the majority of patients to date are left disabled with a considerable impact on functional independence and quality of life. As the absolute number of stroke survivors is likely to further increase due to the demographic changes in our aging societies, new strategies are needed in order to improve neurorehabilitation. The most critical driver of functional recovery post-stroke is neural reorganization. For developing novel, neurobiologically informed strategies to promote recovery of function, an improved understanding of the mechanisms enabling plasticity and recovery is mandatory. This review provides a comprehensive survey of recent developments in the field of stroke recovery using neuroimaging and non-invasive brain stimulation. We discuss current concepts of how the brain reorganizes its functional architecture to overcome stroke-induced deficits, and also present evidence for maladaptive effects interfering with recovery. We demonstrate that the combination of neuroimaging and neurostimulation techniques allows a better understanding of how brain plasticity can be modulated to promote the reorganization of neural networks. Finally, neurotechnology-based treatment strategies allowing patient-tailored interventions to achieve enhanced treatment responses are discussed. The review also highlights important limitations of current models, and finally closes with possible solutions and future directions.