Emergency Consent: Patients' and Surrogates' Perspectives on Consent for Clinical Trials in Acute Stroke and Myocardial Infarction.

Background Emergent informed consent for clinical trials in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and stroke is challenging. The role and value of consent are controversial, and insufficient data exist regarding patients' and surrogates' experiences. Methods and Results We conducted structured interviews with patients (or surrogates) enrolled in AMI or acute stroke trials at 6 sites between 2011 and 2016. Primary domains included trial recall, consent experiences, and preferences regarding involvement. Descriptive and test statistics were used to characterize responses and explore relationships between key domains and characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine associations between key covariates and consent preferences. There were 176 (84 stroke, 92 AMI) completed interviews. Most stroke respondents (82%) were surrogates; all AMI respondents were patients. Average time from trial enrollment to interview was 1.9 years (stroke) and 2.8 years (AMI); 89% of stroke and 62% of AMI respondents remembered being in the trial, and among these respondents, 80% (stroke) and 44% (AMI) remembered reading some of the consent form. Over 90% reported not feeling pressure to enroll, being treated in a caring way, and being treated with dignity. A minority (16% stroke and 26% AMI) reported they would have preferred not to be asked for consent. Just over half (61% stroke and 53% AMI) recalled a postenrollment conversation about the study. Conclusions Most respondents felt they were treated respectfully and were glad they had been asked for consent. Trial recall was relatively low, and many respondents recalled little postenrollment discussion. Further development of context-sensitive approaches to consent is important.

Computed tomographic perfusion to Predict Response to Recanalization in ischemic stroke.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility of computed tomographic (CT) perfusion for selection of patients for endovascular therapy up to 18 hours after symptom onset. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter cohort study of consecutive acute stroke patients scheduled to undergo endovascular therapy within 90 minutes after a baseline CT perfusion. Patients were classified as "target mismatch" if they had a small ischemic core and a large penumbra on their baseline CT perfusion. Reperfusion was defined as >50% reduction in critical hypoperfusion between the baseline CT perfusion and the 36-hour follow-up magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: Of the 201 patients enrolled, 190 patients with an adequate baseline CT perfusion study who underwent angiography were included (mean age = 66 years, median NIH Stroke Scale [NIHSS] = 16, median time from symptom onset to endovascular therapy = 5.2 hours). Rate of reperfusion was 89%. In patients with target mismatch (n = 131), reperfusion was associated with higher odds of favorable clinical response, defined as an improvement of ≥8 points on the NIHSS (83% vs 44%; p = 0.002, adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 6.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.1-20.9). This association did not differ between patients treated within 6 hours (OR = 6.4, 95% CI = 1.5-27.8) and those treated > 6 hours after symptom onset (OR = 13.7, 95% CI = 1.4-140). INTERPRETATION: The robust association between endovascular reperfusion and good outcome among patients with the CT perfusion target mismatch profile treated up to 18 hours after symptom onset supports a randomized trial of endovascular therapy in this patient population. Ann Neurol 2017;81:849-856.