Guo, Xiaofan

BACKGROUND: Small, randomized trials of patients with cervical artery dissection showed conflicting results regarding optimal stroke prevention strategies. We aimed to compare outcomes in patients with cervical artery dissection treated with antiplatelets versus anticoagulation. METHODS: This is a multicenter observational retrospective international study (16 countries, 63 sites) that included patients with cervical artery dissection without major trauma. The exposure was antithrombotic treatment type (anticoagulation versus antiplatelets), and outcomes were subsequent ischemic stroke and major hemorrhage (intracranial or extracranial hemorrhage). We used adjusted Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting to determine associations between anticoagulation and study outcomes within 30 and 180 days. The main analysis used an as-treated crossover approach and only included outcomes occurring with the above treatments. RESULTS: The study included 3636 patients (402 [11.1%] received exclusively anticoagulation and 2453 [67.5%] received exclusively antiplatelets). By day 180, there were 162 new ischemic strokes (4.4%) and 28 major hemorrhages (0.8%); 87.0% of ischemic strokes occurred by day 30. In adjusted Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting, compared with antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulation was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk of subsequent ischemic stroke by day 30 (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.45–1.12]; P =0.145) and by day 180 (adjusted HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.28–2.24]; P =0.670). Anticoagulation therapy was not associated with a higher risk of major hemorrhage by day 30 (adjusted HR, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.35–5.45]; P =0.637) but was by day 180 (adjusted HR, 5.56 [95% CI, 1.53–20.13]; P =0.009). In interaction analyses, patients with occlusive dissection had significantly lower ischemic stroke risk with anticoagulation (adjusted HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.18–0.88]; P interaction =0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Our study does not rule out the benefit of anticoagulation in reducing ischemic stroke risk, particularly in patients with occlusive dissection. If anticoagulation is chosen, it seems reasonable to switch to antiplatelet therapy before 180 days to lower the risk of major bleeding. Large prospective studies are needed to validate our findings.

BACKGROUND: Patients presenting with cervical artery dissection (CAD) are at risk for subsequent ischemic events. We aimed to identify characteristics that are associated with increased risk of ischemic stroke after initial presentation of CAD and to evaluate the differential impact of anticoagulant versus antiplatelet therapy in these high-risk individuals. METHODS: This was a preplanned secondary analysis of the STOP-CAD study (Antithrombotic Treatment for Stroke Prevention in Cervical Artery Dissection), a multicenter international retrospective observational study (63 sites from 16 countries in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Africa) that included patients with CAD predominantly between January 2015 and June 2022. The primary outcome was subsequent ischemic stroke by day 180 after diagnosis. Clinical and imaging variables were compared between those with versus without subsequent ischemic stroke. Significant factors associated with subsequent stroke risk were identified using stepwise Cox regression. Associations between subsequent ischemic stroke risk and antithrombotic therapy type (anticoagulation versus antiplatelets) among patients with identified risk factors were explored using adjusted Cox regression. RESULTS: In all, 4023 patients (mean age was 47.4 years; 44.5% were women) were included. By day 180, subsequent ischemic stroke occurred in 5.3% of the cohort. In adjusted Cox regression, factors associated with increased risk of subsequent ischemic stroke were prior history of ischemic stroke (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 7.31 [95% CI, 1.61–33.13]; P =0.010), presentation within 7 days from first symptoms (aHR, 3.04 [95% CI, 1.04–8.91]; P =0.043), infarct on baseline imaging (aHR, 9.85 [95% CI, 3.65–26.58]; P <0.001), and occlusive dissection (aHR, 2.34 [95% CI, 1.03–5.34]; P =0.043). Only patients with occlusive dissection demonstrated a reduced risk of subsequent ischemic stroke when treated with anticoagulation versus antiplatelets (aHR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.16–0.80]; P =0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of the STOP-CAD study, several factors associated with subsequent ischemic stroke were identified among patients with CAD. Furthermore, we identified a potential benefit of anticoagulation in patients with CAD with occlusive dissection. These findings require validation by meta-analyses of prior studies to formulate optimal treatment strategies for specific high-risk CAD subgroups.

Background Although intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) is safe and effective in populations with general stroke, its impact on cervical artery dissection–related acute ischemic stroke (CeAD‐AIS) remains unclear. This retrospective study used the National Inpatient Sample to compare outcomes in patients with CeAD‐AIS treated with and without IVT. Methods We included adult patients with concurrent CeAD and AIS diagnoses ( International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision [ ICD‐10 ], codes) hospitalized from 2016 to 2019. The primary outcome was home discharge; safety outcomes included inpatient death and intracerebral hemorrhage. We performed survey‐weighted multivariable logistic regressions comparing IVT versus no IVT, followed by interaction analyses to examine effect modifications based on age, medical history, stroke severity, carotid artery involvement, and endovascular treatment. Results Between 2016 and 2019, 1360 (12.1%) of 11 285 patients with CeAD‐AIS received IVT. IVT‐treated patients had higher median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores (median [interquartile range], 8 [4–17] versus 3 [1–11]; P <0.001). Adjusted analyses showed IVT was associated with higher odds of home discharge (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.40 [95% CI, 1.01–1.92]; P =0.042), but not with inpatient death (adjusted OR, 1.29 [95% CI, 0.76–2.20]; P =0.347) or intracerebral hemorrhage (adjusted OR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.32–1.48]; P =0.341). Stroke severity ( P for interaction=0.001) and carotid artery involvement ( P for interaction=0.021) significantly modified IVT's effect on home discharge, with IVT being associated with an increased likelihood of home discharge in patients with moderate to severe strokes (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score >4) and carotid artery involvement. Conclusions IVT improves the likelihood of home discharge in patients with CeAD‐AIS without increasing the risk of inpatient death or intracerebral hemorrhage.

Introduction: The safety and efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in cervical artery dissection-related acute ischemic stroke (CeAD-AIS) remains unclear. We performed a retrospective study of data from the National Inpatient Sample investigating outcomes in CeAD-AIS patients treated with and without IVT. Methods: We included adult patients with CeAD-AIS hospitalized between 2016 to 2019. CeAD-AIS was defined by concurrent CeAD and AIS diagnoses, identified with ICD-10 codes. The primary outcome was home discharge. The safety outcomes were inpatient death and intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). We used survey-weighted multivariable adjusted logistic regressions comparing the groups (IVT versus no IVT), followed by interaction analyses to examine for effect modifications based on age, medical history, stroke severity, and endovascular treatment. Results: Between 2016-2019, 1,360 (12.1%) of 11,285 CeAD-AIS patients received IVT. Patients treated with IVT- had higher NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores (median 8 [4-17] versus 3 [1-11]; p < 0.001). In adjusted analyses, treatment with IVT was associated with a greater odds of home discharge (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-2.05, p = 0.014), but not ICH (aOR 0.90, 95% CI 0.43-1.86, p = 0.773) or inpatient death (aOR 1.22, 95% CI 0.72-2.06, p = 0.454). In interaction analyses, stroke severity significantly interacted with IVT ( p for interaction = 0.001), where IVT was significantly associated with increased likelihood of home discharge in patients with moderate to severe strokes (NIHSS > 4) (aOR 2.28, 95% CI 1.59-3.26, p < 0.001) but not in those with mild stroke (NIHSS 0-4) (aOR 1.03 95% CI 0.62-1.70, p = 0.922). Conclusion: IVT improved the likelihood of home discharge in patients with CeAD-AIS without increasing the risk of inpatient death or ICH.

AbstractBackgroundCervical artery dissection (CAD) is a common cause of ischemic stroke in young adults. Local blood clot formation and distal emboli are the key mechanisms for the development of stroke in patients with CAD. Microemboli distal to the dissection point can be detected as high‐intensity transient signals (HITS) using transcranial Doppler (TCD). Despite this unique capability, TCD is used inconsistently in the management of CAD. In this international survey, we aim to explore the frequency and potential barriers to TCD use in CAD.MethodThis study was an international electronic survey, based on the Antithrombotic Treatment for Stroke Prevention in Cervical Artery Dissection (STOP‐CAD) study, aiming at evaluating the use of TCD in diagnosing and managing CAD patients. A comprehensive questionnaire was developed to gather insights into the current practices, perceptions, and potential barriers to the effective use of TCD in participating centers. The collected data was then analyzed.ResultsFifty‐eight medical centers with advanced stroke care capabilities from Europe and United States participated in this study. Half (29 out of 58) of the sites routinely perform TCD on CAD patients, particularly in the presence of carotid or vertebral artery stenosis, complete carotid occlusion, and early neurologic deterioration. The primary reason for participating institutions not performing TCD was because its results would not change their practice. The protocol for TCD monitoring and managing HITS‐positive CAD patients varied among centers but transitioning from antiplatelet to anticoagulant was the most common practice in this patient population.ConclusionHalf of the stroke centers in our survey routinely perform TCD monitoring for CAD patients. The detection of HITS in CAD patients is a warning sign for providers, which may prompt a change in secondary stroke prevention management. However, a standard protocol for performing TCD in CAD and treatment recommendations for HITS‐positive CAD are not currently available, which warrants further research.