Rabinstein, Alejandro A.

Background and Purpose— The American Heart Association and the American Stroke Association guidelines for early management of patients with ischemic stroke offer guidance to physicians involved in acute stroke care and clarify endovascular treatment indications. The purpose of this study was to assess concordance of physicians’ endovascular treatment decision-making with current American Heart Association and the American Stroke Association stroke treatment guidelines using a survey-approach and to explore how decision-making in the absence of guideline recommendations is approached. Methods— In an international cross-sectional survey (UNMASK-EVT), physicians were randomly assigned 10 of 22 case scenarios (8 constructed with level 1A and 11 with level 2B evidence for endovascular treatment and 3 scenarios without guideline coverage) and asked to declare their treatment approach (1) under their current local resources and (2) assuming there were no external constraints. The proportion of physicians offering endovascular therapy (EVT) was calculated. Subgroup analysis was performed for different specialties, geographic regions, with regard to physicians’ age, endovascular, and general stroke treatment experience. Results— When facing level 1A evidence, participants decided in favor of EVT in 86.8% under current local resources and in 90.6% under assumed ideal conditions, that is, 9.4% decided against EVT even under assumed ideal conditions. In case scenarios with level 2B evidence, 66.3% decided to proceed with EVT under current local resources and 69.7% under assumed ideal conditions. Conclusions— There is potential for improving thinking around the decision to offer endovascular treatment, since physicians did not offer EVT even under assumed ideal conditions in 9.4% despite facing level 1A evidence. A majority of physicians would offer EVT even for level 2B evidence cases.

OBJECTIVEDelayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) and aneurysm rebleeding contribute to morbidity and mortality in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH); however, the relationship between their impacts on overall functional outcome is incompletely understood.METHODSThe authors conducted a cohort study of all aSAH during the study period from 2001 to 2016. Primary end points were overall functional outcome and ischemic aSAH sequelae, defined as delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI), DCI with infarction, symptomatic vasospasm (SV), and global cerebral edema (GCE). Outcomes were compared between the rebleed and nonrebleed cohorts overall and after propensity-score matching (PSM) for risk factors and treatment modality. Univariate and multivariate ordered logistic regression analyses for functional outcomes were performed in the PSM cohort to identify predictors of poor outcome.RESULTSFour hundred fifty-five aSAH cases admitted within 24 hours of aneurysm rupture were included, of which 411 (90%) experienced initial aneurysm ruptures only, while 44 (10%) had clinically confirmed rebleeding. In the overall cohort, rebleeding was associated with significantly worse functional outcome, longer intensive care unit length of stay (LOS), and GCE (all p < 0.01); treatment modality, overall LOS, DCI, DCI with infarction, and SV were nonsignificant. In the PSM analysis of 43 matched rebleed and 43 matched nonrebleed cases, only poor functional outcome and GCE remained significantly associated with rebleeding (p < 0.01 and p = 0.02, respectively). Multivariate regression identified that both rebleeding (HR 21.5, p < 0.01) and DCI (HR 10.1, p = 0.01) independently predicted poor functional outcome.CONCLUSIONSRebleeding and DCI after aSAH are highly morbid and potentially deadly events after aSAH, which appear to have independent negative impacts on overall functional outcome. Early rebleeding did not significantly affect the risk of delayed ischemic complications.

ABSTRACTSeizures and other electrophysiological disturbances are an under‐recognized cause of coma, focal deficits, and prolonged encephalopathy following subdural hematoma evacuation. In these patients, it is possible that seizures remain unrecognized on scalp EEG. It has been shown that a high burden of seizures and other electrophysiological disturbances exist following surgical evacuation and underlie the encephalopathy commonly seen in this patient population, predisposing them to medical complications and confounding estimates of prognosis. As part of a research protocol, we are performing intraoperative placement of cortical surface (non‐parenchyma penetrating) intracranial EEG on patients who present after trauma and require emergent decompressive hemicraniectomy.In this case report of a patient with high‐velocity traumatic epidural, subdural, and subarachnoid hemorrhages, we identified frequent non‐convulsive seizures or seizure‐like SIRPIDs with intracranial cortical surface monitoring that were not identified on simultaneous scalp EEG. Stimulation consistently triggered these electrographic seizures in addition to rhythmic lateralized periodic discharges. His mental status improved rapidly after resolution of these electrographic seizures shortly after increasing antiseizure medications, suggesting that they may have been contributing to his encephalopathy. More research is needed to determine the frequency of this phenomenon and determine whether treatment of such seizures improves patient outcomes.

Background and Purpose— Racial and ethnic disparities in the access to mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) secondary to large vessel occlusion have been previously described. The effect of recent randomized trials validating MT as an effective therapy for AIS secondary to large vessel occlusion on such disparities has not been investigated. Methods— Information on admissions for AIS to endovascular centers occurring between January 2016 and September 2018 was obtained from a national database. The number of patients receiving IV-tPA (intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator) and MT at each institution was determined, and patient demographics were characterized according to age, sex, race/ethnicity, and insurance status. Comparisons of patients who did and did not undergo MT and between patients of different racial and ethnic backgrounds were performed. Demographic variables independently associated with the utilization of MT were identified using multivariate linear regression analysis. Results— There were 206 853 admissions to 173 endovascular centers during the time period of interest. The overall utilization of MT was 8.4%. The utilization of MT for black/Hispanic patients was lower than that among white/non-Hispanic patients (7.0% versus 9.8%; P <0.001). Black/Hispanic patients were also less likely to receive IV-tPA (16.2% versus 20.5%; P <0.001) and to be admitted to the endovascular center after transfer from a different hospital (20.0% versus 30.1%; P <0.001). On multivariate linear regression analysis, increasing institutional proportions of patients with female sex (β=−0.601; P <0.001), insurance with Medicaid or uninsured status (β=−0.153; P =0.029), and black/Hispanic race/ethnicity (β=−0.062; P =0.046) were independently associated with lower institutional utilization of MT. Conclusions— Despite the mainstream acceptance of MT for the treatment of AIS secondary to large vessel occlusion, racial and ethnic disparities in the utilization of MT persist.

Background and purpose Differences in the treatment practice of female and male physicians have been shown in several medical subspecialties. It is currently not known whether this also applies to endovascular stroke treatment. The purpose of this study was to explore whether there are differences in endovascular treatment decisions made by female and male stroke physicians and neurointerventionalists. Methods In an international survey, stroke physicians and neurointerventionalists were randomly assigned 10 case scenarios and asked how they would treat the patient: (A) assuming there were no external constraints and (B) given their local working conditions. Descriptive statistics were used to describe baseline demographics, and the adjusted OR for physician gender as a predictor of endovascular treatment decision was calculated using logistic regression. Results 607 physicians (97 women, 508 men, 2 who did not wish to declare) participated in this survey. Physician gender was neither a significant predictor for endovascular treatment decision under assumed ideal conditions (endovascular therapy was favored by 77.0% of female and 79.3% of male physicians, adjusted OR 1.03, P=0.806) nor under current local resources (endovascular therapy was favored by 69.1% of female and 76.9% of male physicians, adjusted OR 1.03, P=0.814). Conclusion Endovascular therapy decision making between male and female physicians did not differ under assumed ideal conditions or under current local resources.

Background and Purpose— Little is known about the real-life factors that clinicians use in selection of patients that would receive endovascular treatment (EVT) in the real world. We sought to determine patient, practitioner, and health system factors associated with therapeutic decisions around endovascular treatment. Methods— We conducted a multinational cross-sectional web-based study comprising of 607 clinicians and interventionalists from 38 countries who are directly involved in acute stroke care. Participants were randomly allocated to 10 from a pool of 22 acute stroke case scenarios. Each case was classified as either Class I, Class II, or unknown evidence according to the current guidelines. We used logistic regression analysis applying weight of evidence approach. Main outcome measures were multilevel factors associated with EVT, adherence to current EVT guidelines, and practice gaps between current and ideal practice settings. Results— Of the 1330 invited participants, 607 (45.6%) participants completed the study (53.7% neurologists, 28.5% neurointerventional radiologists, 17.8% other clinicians). The weighed evidence approach revealed that National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (34.9%), level of evidence (30.2%), ASPECTS (Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score) or ischemic core volume (22.4%), patient’s age (21.6%), and clinicians’ experience in EVT use (19.3%) are the most important factors for EVT decision. Of 2208 responses that met Class I evidence for EVT, 1917 (86.8%) were in favor of EVT. In case scenarios with no available guidelines, 1070 of 1380 (77.5%) responses favored EVT. Comparison between current and ideal practice settings revealed a small practice gap (941 of 6070 responses, 15.5%). Conclusions— In this large multinational survey, stroke severity, guideline-based level of evidence, baseline brain imaging, patients’ age and physicians’ experience were the most relevant factors for EVT decision-making. The high agreement between responses and Class I guideline recommendations and high EVT use even when guidelines were not available reflect the real-world acceptance of EVT as standard of care in patients with disabling acute ischemic stroke.