Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage With Tenecteplase vs Alteplase in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: The Comparative Effectiveness of Routine Tenecteplase vs Alteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke (CERTAIN) Collaboration.

Importance: Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) is a serious complication of stroke thrombolytic therapy. Many stroke centers have adopted 0.25-mg/kg tenecteplase instead of alteplase for stroke thrombolysis based on evidence from randomized comparisons to alteplase as well as for its practical advantages. There have been no significant differences in symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) reported from randomized clinical trials or published case series for the 0.25-mg/Kg dose. Objective: To assess the risk of sICH following ischemic stroke in patients treated with tenecteplase compared to those treated with alteplase. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective observational study using data from the large multicenter international Comparative Effectiveness of Routine Tenecteplase vs Alteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke (CERTAIN) collaboration comprising deidentified data on patients with ischemic stroke treated with intravenous thrombolysis. Data from more than 100 hospitals in New Zealand, Australia, and the US that used alteplase or tenecteplase for patients treated between July 1, 2018, and June 30, 2021, were included for analysis. Participating centers included a mix of nonthrombectomy- and thrombectomy-capacity comprehensive stroke centers. Standardized data were abstracted and harmonized from local or regional clinical registries. Consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke who were considered eligible and received thrombolysis at the participating stroke registries during the study period were included. All 9238 patients who received thrombolysis were included in this retrospective analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: sICH was defined as clinical worsening of at least 4 points on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), attributed to parenchymal hematoma, subarachnoid, or intraventricular hemorrhage. Differences between tenecteplase and alteplase in the risk of sICH were assessed using logistic regression, adjusted for age, sex, NIHSS score, and thrombectomy. Results: Of the 9238 patients included in the analysis, the median (IQR) age was 71 (59-80) years, and 4449 patients (48%) were female. Tenecteplase was administered to 1925 patients. The tenecteplase group was older (median [IQR], 73 [61-81] years vs 70 [58-80] years; P < .001), more likely to be male (1034 of 7313 [54%] vs 3755 of 1925 [51%]; P < .01), had higher NIHSS scores (median [IQR], 9 [5-17] vs 7 [4-14]; P < .001), and more frequently underwent endovascular thrombectomy (38% vs 20%; P < .001). The proportion of patients with sICH was 1.8% for tenecteplase and 3.6% for alteplase (P < .001), with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 0.42 (95% CI, 0.30-0.58; P < .01). Similar results were observed in both thrombectomy and nonthrombectomy subgroups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this large study, ischemic stroke treatment with 0.25-mg/kg tenecteplase was associated with lower odds of sICH than treatment with alteplase. The results provide evidence supporting the safety of tenecteplase for stroke thrombolysis in real-world clinical practice.

COVID-19 Impact on Acute Ischemic Stroke Treatment at 9 Comprehensive Stroke Centers across Los Angeles.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of COVID-19 on acute cerebrovascular disease care across 9 comprehensive stroke centers throughout Los Angeles County (LAC). METHODS: Volume of emergency stroke code activations, patient characteristics, stroke severity, reperfusion rates, treatment times, and outcomes from February 1 to April 30, 2020, were compared against the same time period in 2019. Demographic data were provided by each participating institution. RESULTS: There was a 17.3% decrease in stroke code activations across LAC in 2020 compared to 2019 (1,786 vs. 2,159, respectively, χ2 goodness of fit test p < 0.0001) across 9 participating comprehensive stroke centers. Patients who did not receive any reperfusion therapy decreased by 16.6% in 2020 (1,527) compared to 2019 (1,832). Patients who received only intravenous thrombolytic (IVT) therapy decreased by 31.8% (107 vs. 157). Patients who received only mechanical thrombectomy (MT) increased by 3% (102 vs. 99). Patients who received both IVT and MT decreased by 31.8% (45 vs. 66). Recanalization treatment times in 2020 were comparable to 2019. CSCs serving a higher proportion of Latinx populations in the eastern parts of LAC experienced a higher incidence of MT in 2020 compared to 2019. Mild increase in stroke severity was seen in 2020 compared to 2019 (8.95 vs. 8.23, p = 0.046). A higher percentage of patients were discharged home in 2020 compared to 2019 (59.5 vs. 56.1%, p = 0.034), a lower percentage of patients were discharged to skilled nursing facility (16.1 vs. 20.7%, p = 0.0004), and a higher percentage of patients expired (8.6 vs. 6.3%, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: LAC saw a decrease in overall stroke code activations in 2020 compared to 2019. Reperfusion treatment times remained comparable to prepandemic metrics. There has been an increase in severe stroke incidence and higher volume of thrombectomy treatments in Latinx communities within LAC during the pandemic of 2020. More patients were discharged home, less patients discharged to skilled nursing facilities, and more patients expired in 2020, compared to the same time frame in 2019.