Characteristics of a COVID-19 Cohort With Large Vessel Occlusion: A Multicenter International Study.

BACKGROUND: The mechanisms and outcomes in coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-associated stroke are unique from those of non-COVID-19 stroke. OBJECTIVE: To describe the efficacy and outcomes of acute revascularization of large vessel occlusion (LVO) in the setting of COVID-19 in an international cohort. METHODS: We conducted an international multicenter retrospective study of consecutively admitted patients with COVID-19 with concomitant acute LVO across 50 comprehensive stroke centers. Our control group constituted historical controls of patients presenting with LVO and receiving a mechanical thrombectomy between January 2018 and December 2020. RESULTS: The total cohort was 575 patients with acute LVO; 194 patients had COVID-19 while 381 patients did not. Patients in the COVID-19 group were younger (62.5 vs 71.2; P < .001) and lacked vascular risk factors (49, 25.3% vs 54, 14.2%; P = .001). Modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 3 revascularization was less common in the COVID-19 group (74, 39.2% vs 252, 67.2%; P < .001). Poor functional outcome at discharge (defined as modified Ranklin Scale 3-6) was more common in the COVID-19 group (150, 79.8% vs 132, 66.7%; P = .004). COVID-19 was independently associated with a lower likelihood of achieving modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 3 (odds ratio [OR]: 0.4, 95% CI: 0.2-0.7; P < .001) and unfavorable outcomes (OR: 2.5, 95% CI: 1.4-4.5; P = .002). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 was an independent predictor of incomplete revascularization and poor outcomes in patients with stroke due to LVO. Patients with COVID-19 with LVO were younger, had fewer cerebrovascular risk factors, and suffered from higher morbidity/mortality rates.

International controlled study of revascularization and outcomes following COVID-positive mechanical thrombectomy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous studies suggest that mechanisms and outcomes in patients with COVID-19-associated stroke differ from those in patients with non-COVID-19-associated strokes, but there is limited comparative evidence focusing on these populations. The aim of this study, therefore, was to determine if a significant association exists between COVID-19 status with revascularization and functional outcomes following thrombectomy for large vessel occlusion (LVO), after adjustment for potential confounding factors. METHODS: A cross-sectional, international multicenter retrospective study was conducted in consecutively admitted COVID-19 patients with concomitant acute LVO, compared to a control group without COVID-19. Data collected included age, gender, comorbidities, clinical characteristics, details of the involved vessels, procedural technique, and various outcomes. A multivariable-adjusted analysis was conducted. RESULTS: In this cohort of 697 patients with acute LVO, 302 had COVID-19 while 395 patients did not. There was a significant difference (p < 0.001) in the mean age (in years) and gender of patients, with younger patients and more males in the COVID-19 group. In terms of favorable revascularization (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction [mTICI] grade 3), COVID-19 was associated with lower odds of complete revascularization (odds ratio 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.48; p < 0.001), which persisted on multivariable modeling with adjustment for other predictors (adjusted odds ratio 0.30, 95% CI 0.12-0.77; p = 0.012). Moreover, endovascular complications, in-hospital mortality, and length of hospital stay were significantly higher among COVID-19 patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 was an independent predictor of incomplete revascularization and poor functional outcome in patients with stroke due to LVO. Furthermore, COVID-19 patients with LVO were more often younger and had higher morbidity/mortality rates.

Age and Acute Ischemic Stroke Outcome in North American Patients With COVID-19.

Background Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in the context of COVID-19 has received considerable attention for its propensity to affect patients of all ages. We aimed to evaluate the effect of age on functional outcome and mortality following an acute ischemic event. Methods and Results A prospectively maintained database from comprehensive stroke centers in Canada and the United States was analyzed for patients with AIS from March 14 to September 30, 2020 who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The primary outcome was Modified Rankin Scale score at discharge, and the secondary outcome was mortality. Baseline characteristics, laboratory values, imaging, and thrombectomy workflow process times were assessed. Among all 126 patients with COVID-19 who were diagnosed with AIS, the median age was 63 years (range, 27-94). There were 35 (27.8%) patients with AIS in the aged ≤55 years group, 47 (37.3%) in the aged 56 to 70 group, and 44 (34.9%) in the aged >70 group. Intravenous tissue plasminogen activator and thrombectomy rates were comparable across these groups, (P=0.331 and 0.212, respectively). There was a significantly lower rate of mortality between each group favoring younger age (21.9% versus 45.0% versus 48.8%, P=0.047). After multivariable adjustment for possible confounders, a 1-year increase in age was significantly associated with fewer instances of a favorable outcome of Modified Rankin Scale 0 to 2 (odds ratio [OR], 0.95; 95 CI%, 0.90-0.99; P=0.048) and higher mortality (OR, 1.06; 95 CI%, 1.02-1.10; P=0.007). Conclusions AIS in the context of COVID-19 affects young patients at much greater rates than pre-pandemic controls. Nevertheless, instances of poor functional outcome and mortality are closely tied to increasing age.

Risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) from hospital admission and the impact of protection efforts on acute stroke treatment.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear how interventions designed to restrict community and in-hospital exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) virus influenced stroke care for patients seeking acute treatment. Therefore, we aimed to determine how these COVID-19 interventions impacted acute stroke treatment times and to assess the risk of contracting COVID-19 due to their stay in our medical center. METHODS: Retrospective, single center, two-phase study evaluating hospital and community trends from 12/2019 - 04/2020 compared to the previous year and pre/post (n = 156/93) intervention implementation. Phase I assessed stroke treatment times, delay to hospital arrival, and witnessed stroke volume. Phase II, a post-implementation telephone survey, assessed risk of developing symptoms or testing positive for COVID-19. RESULTS: Stroke volume declined by 29% (p < .05) from April to March compared to the previous year. However, no significant delays in seeking medical care (pre Mdn=112, post Mdn=95, p = .34) was observed. Witnessed stroke volume decreased 11% (p < .001) compared to the pre-implementation group, but no significant delay in IV alteplase (pre Mdn=22 mins; post Mdn=26 mins, p = .08) nor endovascular treatment (pre Mdn=60 mins; post Mdn=80 mins, p = .45) was observed. In Phase II, 63 patients participated, two tested (3%) COVID-19 positive during admission and four (6%) within two weeks of discharge. COVID-19 contraction risk during and after hospitalization remained similar to the general population (RR=1.75, 95%CI: 0.79-3.63). Overall results indicated a marked decrease in stroke volume, no significant delays to either seek or provide acute stroke care were evident, and COVID-19 contraction risk was low. CONCLUSIONS: Seeking acute stroke medical care outweighs the risk of COVID-19 exposure.

The professional and personal impact of the coronavirus pandemic on US neurointerventional practices: a nationwide survey.

BACKGROUND: Little is currently known about the effects of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on neurointerventional (NI) procedural volumes or its toll on physician wellness. METHODS: A 37-question online survey was designed and distributed to physician members of three NI physician organizations. RESULTS: A total of 151 individual survey responses were obtained. Reduced mechanical thrombectomy procedures compared with pre-pandemic were observed with 32% reporting a greater than 50% reduction in thrombectomy volumes. In concert with most (76%) reporting at least a 25% reduction in non-mechanical thrombectomy urgent NI procedures and a nearly unanimous (96%) cessation of non-urgent elective cases, 68% of physicians reported dramatic reductions (>50%) in overall NI procedural volume compared with pre-pandemic. Increased door-to-puncture times were reported by 79%. COVID-19-positive infections occurred in 1% of physician respondents: an additional 8% quarantined for suspected infection. Sixty-six percent of respondents reported increased career stress, 56% increased personal life/family stress, and 35% increased career burnout. Stress was significantly increased in physicians with COVID-positive family members (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study designed to understand the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on NI physician practices, case volumes, compensation, personal/family stresses, and work-related burnout. Future studies examining these factors following the resumption of elective cases and relaxing of social distancing measures will be necessary to better understand these phenomena.

Neuroendovascular clinical trials disruptions due to COVID-19. Potential future challenges and opportunities.

To assess the impact of COVID-19 on neurovascular research and deal with the challenges imposed by the pandemic. METHODS: A survey-based study focused on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and single-arm studies for acute ischemic stroke and cerebral aneurysms was developed by a group of senior neurointerventionalists and sent to sites identified through the clinical trials website (https://clinicaltrials.gov/), study sponsors, and physician investigators. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 101 institutions, with 65 responding (64%). Stroke RCTs were being conducted at 40 (62%) sites, aneurysm RCTs at 22 (34%) sites, stroke single-arm studies at 37 (57%) sites, and aneurysm single-arm studies at 43 (66%) sites. Following COVID-19, enrollment was suspended at 51 (78%) sites-completely at 21 (32%) and partially at 30 (46%) sites. Missed trial-related clinics and imaging follow-ups and protocol deviations were reported by 27 (42%), 24 (37%), and 27 (42%) sites, respectively. Negative reimbursements were reported at 17 (26%) sites. The majority of sites, 49 (75%), had put new trials on hold. Of the coordinators, 41 (63%) worked from home and 20 (31%) reported a personal financial impact. Remote consent was possible for some studies at 34 (52%) sites and for all studies at 5 (8%) sites. At sites with suspended trials (n=51), endovascular treatment without enrollment occurred at 31 (61%) sites for stroke and 23 (45%) sites for aneurysms. A total of 277 patients with acute ischemic stroke and 184 with cerebral aneurysms were treated without consideration for trial enrollment. CONCLUSION: Widespread disruption of neuroendovascular trials occurred because of COVID-19. As sites resume clinical research, steps to mitigate similar challenges in the future should be considered.