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.

Showing posts with label 'good functional outcome'. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 'good functional outcome'. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 21, 2024

Predictors of Good Functional Outcomes in Posterior Circulation Stroke After Mechanical Thrombectomy With Stent Retrievers: An Individual Patient‐Data Pooled Analysis From the TRACK and NASA Registries

Is this a 'good functional outcome' as described by the patients? By definition a good functional outcome for a survivor is 100%  recovery. DON'T YOU DARE SUGGEST ANYTHING LESS IS GOOD!

Predictors of Good Functional Outcomes in Posterior Circulation Stroke After Mechanical Thrombectomy With Stent Retrievers: An Individual Patient‐Data Pooled Analysis From the TRACK and NASA Registries

Originally publishedhttps://doi.org/10.1161/SVIN.123.001017Stroke: Vascular and Interventional Neurology. 2024;0:e001017

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Recent randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that endovascular therapy for basilar artery occlusion is safe and potentially effective, predominantly in the non‐White population. The aim of this study was to identify predictors of good functional outcome in posterior circulation strokes in US population after mechanical thrombectomy from the TRACK (Trevo Stent‐Retriever Acute Stroke) and the NASA (North American Solitaire Stent Retriever Acute Stroke) registries from North America.

METHODS

Patient‐level data from the TRACK and NASA registries were pooled, and patients with posterior circulation stroke were included in this analysis. Patients were dichotomized into those with 90‐day good functional outcome (modified Rankin scale [mRS] score 0–2) and poor functional outcome (mRS score ≥3). Baseline and procedural data were compared between the 2 cohorts. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of functional outcome. P < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Of 119 posterior stroke patients (99 [83.2%] basilar artery, 16 [13.4%] vertebral artery, and 4 [3.4%] posterior cerebral artery), 110 patients had 90‐day mRS data available on follow‐up. Good functional outcome was observed in 44 patients (40%). Patients with mRS score 0–2 were less likely to have hypertension (61.4% versus 83.3%; P = 0.01), hyperlipidemia (38.6% versus 62.1%; P = 0.016), and diabetes (18.2% versus 36.4%; P = 0.040). Patients with mRS score 0–2 had a lower mean presentation National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score (15.2±9.95 versus 22.6±9.50; P < 0.001) and more likelihood of achieving Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction 3 (79.5% versus 42.2%; P < 0.001). There was no difference between 2 cohorts in time to puncture, use of balloon guide catheter, use of general anesthesia, and number of passes. On multivariate analysis, higher presentation National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and hypertension were associated with worse functional outcomes. Complete recanalization and the receipt of intravenous tissue‐type plasminogen activator were associated with higher odds of achieving good functional outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In this pooled analysis of the NASA and TRACK registries, patients with posterior circulation stroke achieving good outcomes were more likely to have lower presentation National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and fewer comorbidities. Use of intravenous tissue‐type plasminogen activator, hypertension, final Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction 3, and lower baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score were independent predictors of functional outcome.

Friday, April 1, 2022

Off-Label Use of Tenecteplase for the Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke

 Once again you will notice they are testing the wrong endpoints; 'good functional outcome' rather than 100% RECOVERY. THIS is why survivors need to be in charge, we won't take our eyes off the only goal in stroke: 100% RECOVERY.

Off-Label Use of Tenecteplase for the Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(3):e224506. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.4506
Key Points

Question  How does the use of tenecteplase compare with the use of alteplase in the clinical outcomes of patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) receiving intravenous thrombolysis?

Findings  In this systematic review and meta-analysis, 6 nonrandomized studies including 1820 participants were analyzed. Intravenous tenecteplase was associated with better short-term and long-term functional outcomes in patients with AIS and a higher likelihood of successful recanalization in patients with acute intracranial vessel occlusions; no increased risk of intracranial bleeding was noted with intravenous tenecteplase compared with alteplase.

Meaning  Analysis of evidence from nonrandomized studies suggests that tenecteplase is as safe as alteplase for the treatment of AIS and tenecteplase is potentially associated with more favorable outcomes.

Abstract

Importance  Tenecteplase is being evaluated as an alternative thrombolytic agent for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) within ongoing randomized clinical trials (RCTs). In addition, nonrandomized clinical experiences with off-label use of tenecteplase vs alteplase for AIS treatment are being published.

Objective  To evaluate the available evidence on the safety and efficacy of intravenous tenecteplase compared with intravenous alteplase provided by nonrandomized studies.

Data Sources  Eligible studies were identified by searching MEDLINE and Scopus databases. No language or other restrictions were imposed. The literature search was conducted on October 12, 2021. This meta-analysis used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and was written according to the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) proposal.

Study Selection  Nonrandomized studies (prospective or retrospective) comparing intravenous tenecteplase (at any dose) with intravenous alteplase in patients with AIS were included in the analysis.

Data Extraction and Synthesis  The crude odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated for the association of tenecteplase vs alteplase with the outcomes of interest and adjusted ORs were extracted if provided. Estimates using random-effects models were pooled.

Main Outcomes and Measures  The primary outcome was the probability of good functional outcome (modified Rankin scale [mRS] score, 0-2) at 90 days.

Results  Six studies were identified including a total of 1820 patients (618 [34%] treated with tenecteplase). Patients receiving tenecteplase had higher odds of 3-month good functional outcome (crude odds ratio [OR], 1.22; 95% CI, 0.90-1.66; adjusted OR, 1.60, 95% CI, 1.08-2.37), successful recanalization (crude OR, 2.82; 95% CI, 1.12-7.10; adjusted OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.18-4.81), and early neurological improvement (crude OR, 4.88; 95% CI, 2.03-11.71; adjusted OR, 7.60; 95% CI, 1.97-29.41). No significant differences were detected in 3-month excellent functional outcome proportions (mRS score 0-1; crude OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 0.81-2.91; adjusted OR, 2.51; 95% CI, 0.66- 9.49), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (crude OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.44-2.16; adjusted OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.13-10.50), or parenchymal hematoma (crude OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.24-5.95).

Conclusions and Relevance  Evidence from nonrandomized studies suggests tenecteplase is as safe as alteplase and potentially associated with improved functional outcomes compared with alteplase. Based on these findings, enrollment in the ongoing RCTs appears to be appropriate.

 

 

Tuesday, December 14, 2021

Thrombectomy With and Without Computed Tomography Perfusion Imaging in the Early Time Window: A Pooled Analysis of Patient-Level Data

 The tyranny of low expectations front and center. 'Good functional outcome' instead of 100% RECOVERY. 

What the fuck good does this do if you are not even measuring 100% recovery? You do realize the only goal in stroke is 100% recovery? If not get the hell out of stroke.

 With no measurements of 100% recovery they obviously have no intention of solving stroke at all.

Business 101: If you don't measure it, it is not important, so obviously 100% recovery is not important. 

“What's measured, improves.” So said management legend and author Peter F. Drucker 

The latest here:

Thrombectomy With and Without Computed Tomography Perfusion Imaging in the Early Time Window: A Pooled Analysis of Patient-Level Data

Originally publishedhttps://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.034331Stroke. 2021;0:STROKEAHA.121.034331

Background and Purpose:

The optimal imaging paradigm for endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) patient selection in early time window (0–6 hours) treated acute ischemic stroke patients remains uncertain. We aimed to compare post-EVT outcomes between patients who underwent prerandomization basic (noncontrast computed tomography [CT], CT angiography only) versus additional advanced imaging (computed tomography perfusion [CTP] imaging) and to determine the association of performance of prerandomization CTP imaging with clinical outcomes.

Methods:

The HERMES collaboration (Highly Effective Reperfusion Evaluated in Multiple Endovascular Stroke Trials) pooled patient-level data from randomized controlled trials comparing EVT with usual care for acute ischemic stroke due to anterior circulation large vessel occlusion. Good functional outcome, defined as modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 2 at 90 days, was compared between randomized patients with and without CTP baseline imaging. Univariable and multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the association of baseline CTP imaging and good functional outcome.

Results:

We analyzed 1348 patients 610 (45.3%) of whom underwent CTP prerandomization. The benefit of EVT compared with best medical management was maintained irrespective of the baseline imaging paradigm (90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0–2 in EVT versus control patients: with CTP: 46.0% (137/298) versus 28.9% (88/305), without CTP: 44.1% (162/367) versus 27.3% (100/366). Performance of CTP baseline imaging compared with baseline noncontrast CT and CT angiography only yielded similar rates of good outcome (odds ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.82–1.33], adjusted odds ratio, 1.04, [95% CI, 0.80–1.35]).

Conclusions:

Rates of good functional outcome were similar among patients in whom CTP was or was not performed, and EVT treatment effect in the 0- to 6-hour time window was similar in patients with and without baseline CTP imaging.

 
 

Tuesday, June 1, 2021

EXPRESS: Direct mechanical thrombectomy without intravenous thrombolysis versus bridging therapy for acute ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

You have the wrong outcome measured. 'good functional outcome'  IS NOT WHAT SURVIVORS WANT. They want 100% recovery, not your tyranny of low expectations.  Will you be OK with 'good functional outcome' when your children and grandchildren have strokes?

EXPRESS: Direct mechanical thrombectomy without intravenous thrombolysis versus bridging therapy for acute ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

First Published May 18, 2021 Research Article 

Background

Direct mechanical thrombectomy (dMT) may result in similar outcomes compared to a bridging approach with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT+MT) in acute ischaemic stroke. Recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have varied in their design and non-inferiority margins (NIM).

Aim

We sought to meta-analyse accumulated trial data to assess the difference and non-inferiority in clinical and procedural outcomes between dMT and bridging therapy.

Summary of review

We conducted a systematic review of electronic databases following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted for the pooled data. The primary outcome was good functional outcome at 90 days (modified Rankin Scale (mRS)≤2). Secondary outcomes included excellent functional outcome (mRS≤1), mortality, any intracranial haemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH, successful reperfusion (TICI2b) and procedure-related complications. Four RCTs comprising 1633 patients (817 dMT, 816 bridging therapy) were included. There were no statistical differences for the 90-day good functional outcome (OR=1.02, 95%CI 0.84-1.25, p=0.54, I2=0%), and the absolute risk difference was 1% (95% CI −4% to 5%). The lower 95% CI falls within the strictest NIM of -10% among included RCTs. dMT reduced the odds of successful reperfusion (OR=0.76, 95%CI 0.60-0.97, p=0.03, I2=0%) and any ICH (OR=0.65, 95%CI 0.49-0.86, p=0.003, I2=38%). There was no difference in the remaining secondary outcomes. The risk of bias for all studies was low.

Conclusion

The combined trial data assessing dMT versus bridging therapy showed no difference in improving good functional outcome. The wide non-inferiority thresholds set by individual trials are in contrast with the clinical consensus on minimally important differences. However, our pooled analysis indicates non-inferiority of dMT with a 4% margin of confidence. The application of these findings is limited to patients presenting directly to MT-capable centres and real-world workflow times may differ against those achieved in a trial setting.