Citations

The administration of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) for patients with acute ischemic stroke who have recently ingested direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) presents a clinical challenge due to the perceived increased risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Traditional guidelines from the US and European authorities advise against IVT within 48 h of last DOAC ingestion, unless specific coagulation tests indicate safety. However, emerging observational studies suggest that IVT might be safe in selected patients. A US stroke registry study and a global multicenter cohort study both reported no significant increase in symptomatic ICH among patients on DOACs compared to those not on anticoagulants. A systematic review of all published observational studies further supported these findings, showing comparable bleeding rates and functional outcomes in DOAC-treated patients. Reversal agents like idarucizumab for dabigatran have demonstrated potential in facilitating safer IVT administration, though logistical and cost-related barriers limit their widespread use. The variability in global guidelines reflects differing approaches to risk assessment and resource availability, highlighting the need for individualized treatment decisions. In India, the increasing prevalence of atrial fibrillation and stroke as well as prescription of DOACs necessitate adapted guidelines that consider local health-care infrastructure. Despite the promising observational data, the lack of randomized controlled trials underscores the need for further research to establish robust evidence for IVT use in this context. Collaborative international efforts and inclusion of diverse patient populations in future studies will be crucial to refine treatment protocols and improve outcomes for stroke patients on DOACs.

The recommended empiric ceftriaxone dosing regimen for acute bacterial meningitis in adults is 2 g every 12 h. After penicillin-susceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae is isolated as a causative microorganism, the ceftriaxone dose may be continued or reduced to a single dose of 2 g every 24 h, per institutional preference. There is no clear guidance that indicates the superiority of one regimen over the other. The objective of this study was to evaluate the susceptibility of S. pneumoniae in the cerebral spinal fluid (CSF) of patients with meningitis and the relationship between ceftriaxone dose and clinical outcomes. We identified 52 patients with S. pneumoniae meningitis with positive CSF cultures who were treated at the University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland, over a 19-year period. We collected clinical and microbiological data for evaluation. Broth microdilution and Etest methods were performed to test penicillin and ceftriaxone susceptibility. All isolates were susceptible to ceftriaxone. Ceftriaxone was empirically used in 50 patients, with a starting dosing regimen of 2 g every 24 h in 15 patients and 2 g every 12 h in 35 patients. In 32 patients started on a twice-daily regimen (91%), doses were reduced to once daily after a median of 1.5 (95% CI 1–2) days. The overall in-hospital mortality was 15.4% (n = 8), and 45.7% of patients reported at least one sequela of meningitis at the last follow-up (median 375, 95% CI 189–1585 days). We found no statistical difference in outcome between the 2 g every 24 h and the 2 g every 12 h ceftriaxone dosing regimens. A ceftriaxone total daily dose of 2 g may be associated with similar outcomes to a 4 g total daily dose, provided that the causative organism is highly susceptible to ceftriaxone. The persistence of neurological and infection sequelae at the last follow-up underscores the need for optimal treatment of these complex infections.

Background Since 2015, endovascular therapy has been established as a standard of care for acute stroke. This has caused major challenges regarding the organization of systems of care, which have to meet the increasing demand for thrombectomies. This study aims to evaluate how endovascular therapy decisions made by European and North American physicians under their current local resources differ from those made under assumed ideal conditions. Methods In an international, multidisciplinary survey, physicians involved in acute stroke care were asked to give their treatment decisions to 10 out of 22 randomly assigned stroke case-scenarios. Participants stated (a) their treatment approach under assumed ideal conditions (without any external limitations) and (b) the treatment they would pursue under their current local resources. Resources gaps (ideal minus current endovascular therapy rates) were calculated for different countries/states/provinces and correlated to economic and healthcare key metrics (gross domestic product-per-capita, public or private health insurance coverage, etc.). Results A total of 607 physicians, among them 218 from North America and 136 from 25 European countries, responded to the survey. Resources gaps in the majority of North American states/provinces and European countries were small (<5%). The highest gaps were observed among few European countries, namely Poland (30%) and the United Kingdom (33%). The magnitude of the resources gap did not correlate to national economic or healthcare metrics. Discussion and conclusion In the majority of North American states/provinces and European countries covered in this study, the discrepancy between endovascular therapy decisions under current local resources and assumed ideal conditions seems to be small, even in countries with a limited economic status and healthcare infrastructure.

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.

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.

Limited data exist on clot composition and detailed characteristics of arterial thrombi associated with large vessel occlusion in acute ischemic stroke. Advances in endovascular thrombectomy and related imaging modalities have created a unique opportunity to analyze thrombi removed from cerebral arteries. Insights into thrombus composition, etiology, physical properties and neurovascular interactions may lead to future advancements in acute ischemic stroke treatment and improved clinical outcomes. Advances in imaging techniques may enhance clot characterization and inform therapeutic decision-making prior to treatment and reveal stroke etiology to guide secondary prevention. Current imaging techniques can provide some information about thrombi, but there remains much to evaluate about relationships that may exist among thrombus composition, occlusion characteristics and treatment outcomes. Improved pathophysiological characterization of clot types, their properties and how these properties change over time, together with clinical correlates from ongoing studies, may facilitate revascularization with thrombolysis and thrombectomy. Interdisciplinary approaches covering clinical, engineering and scientific aspects of thrombus research will be key to advancing the understanding of thrombi and improving acute ischemic stroke therapy. This consensus statement integrates recent research on clots and thrombi retrieved from cerebral arteries and provides a rationale for further analyses, including current opportunities and limitations.

The optimal route for insulin administration by insulin infusion devices has not been established. To assess the differences between the peripheral venous and portal venous routes of insulin administration on postprandial metabolic responses, six alloxan-diabetic dogs were studied on four occasions. On the first, the insulin infusion rates given by the Biostator for disposal of a mixed meal were recorded electronically. On two subsequent occasions, these insulin infusion profiles were administered by a peripheral vein. On an additional occasion, the identical insulin infusion profile was given via the portal vein. No differences were observed in basal or peak plasma glucose, insulin, glucagon, branched chain amino acids, and lactate concentrations between portal and peripheral venous insulin administration. Furthermore, no differences in isotopically ([2-3H]glucose) determined rates of systemic glucose appearance and disappearance were observed between the two routes. Although preprandial plasma alanine concentrations were greater when insulin was infused via the portal vein, the postprandial increments did not differ from those observed during infusion of insulin by a peripheral vein. These studies suggest that under the current experimental conditions, there appears to be no difference in the disposition of a mixed meal, measured as net whole body glucose appearance and disappearance rates, when insulin is administered in an open-loop fashion via either a peripheral or the portal vein.