Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Sunday, October 7, 2012

Safety and efficacy of NA-1 in patients with iatrogenic stroke after endovascular aneurysm repair (ENACT): a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Is this enough to push out to all stroke hospitals?
Who is going to do that? I want a name.
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laneur/article/PIIS1474-4422%2812%2970225-9/abstract

Background

Neuroprotection with NA-1 (Tat-NR2B9c), an inhibitor of postsynaptic density-95 protein, has been shown in a primate model of stroke. We assessed whether NA-1 could reduce ischaemic brain damage in human beings.

Methods

For this double-blind, randomised, controlled study, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older who had a ruptured or unruptured intracranial aneurysm amenable to endovascular repair from 14 hospitals in Canada and the USA. We used a computer-generated randomisation sequence to allocate patients to receive an intravenous infusion of either NA-1 or saline control at the end of their endovascular procedure (1:1; stratified by site, age, and aneurysm status). Both patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was safety and primary clinical outcomes were the number and volume of new ischaemic strokes defined by MRI at 12—95 h after infusion. We used a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00728182.

Findings

Between Sept 16, 2008, and March 30, 2011, we randomly allocated 197 patients to treatment—12 individuals did not receive treatment because they were found to be ineligible after randomisation, so the mITT population consisted of 185 individuals, 92 in the NA-1 group and 93 in the placebo group. Two minor adverse events were adjudged to be associated with NA-1; no serious adverse events were attributable to NA-1. We recorded no difference between groups in the volume of lesions by either diffusion-weighted MRI (adjusted p value=0·120) or fluid-attenuated inversion recovery MRI (adjusted p value=0·236). Patients in the NA-1 group sustained fewer ischaemic infarcts than did patients in the placebo group, as gauged by diffusion-weighted MRI (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0·53, 95% CI 0·38—0·74) and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery MRI (0·59, 0·42—0·83).

Interpretation

Our findings suggest that neuroprotection in human ischaemic stroke is possible and that it should be investigated in larger trials.

No comments:

Post a Comment