Delivery of acute ischaemic stroke treatments in the European region in 2019 and 2020.

INTRODUCTION: We assessed best available data on access and delivery of acute stroke unit (SU) care, intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and endovascular treatment (EVT) in the European region in 2019 and 2020. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compared national data per number of inhabitants and per 100 annual incident first-ever ischaemic strokes (AIIS) in 46 countries. Population estimates and ischaemic stroke incidence were based on United Nations data and the Global Burden of Disease Report 2019, respectively. RESULTS: The estimated mean number of acute SUs in 2019 was 3.68 (95% CI: 2.90-4.45) per one million inhabitants (MIH) with 7/44 countries having less than one SU per one MIH. The estimated mean annual number of IVTs was 21.03 (95% CI: 15.63-26.43) per 100,000 and 17.14% (95% CI: 12.98-21.30) of the AIIS in 2019, with highest country rates at 79.19 and 52.66%, respectively, and 15 countries delivering less than 10 IVT per 100,000. The estimated mean annual number of EVTs in 2019 was 7.87 (95% CI: 5.96-9.77) per 100,000 and 6.91% (95% CI: 5.15-8.67) of AIIS, with 11 countries delivering less than 1.5 EVT per 100,000. Rates of SUs, IVT and EVT were stable in 2020. There was an increase in mean rates of SUs, IVT and EVT compared to similar data from 2016. CONCLUSION: Although there was an increase in reperfusion treatment rates in many countries between 2016 and 2019, this was halted in 2020. There are persistent major inequalities in acute stroke treatment in the European region. Tailored strategies directed to the most vulnerable regions should be prioritised.

European Stroke Organisation (ESO) expedited recommendation on tenecteplase for acute ischaemic stroke.

Within the last year, four randomised-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have been published comparing intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with tenecteplase and alteplase in acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) patients with a non-inferiority design for three of them. An expedited recommendation process was initiated by the European Stroke Organisation (ESO) and conducted according to ESO standard operating procedure based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. We identified three relevant Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome (PICO) questions, performed systematic reviews of the literature and meta-analyses, assessed the quality of the available evidence, and wrote evidence-based recommendations. Expert consensus statements were provided if insufficient evidence was available to provide recommendations based on the GRADE approach. For patients with AIS of <4.5 h duration who are eligible for IVT, tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg can be used as a safe and effective alternative to alteplase 0.9 mg/kg (moderate evidence, strong recommendation). For patients with AIS of <4.5 h duration who are eligible for IVT, we recommend against using tenecteplase at a dose of 0.40 mg/kg (low evidence, strong recommendation). For patients with AIS of <4.5 h duration with prehospital management with a mobile stroke unit who are eligible for IVT, we suggest tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg over alteplase 0.90 mg/kg (low evidence, weak recommendation). For patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) AIS of <4.5 h duration who are eligible for IVT, we recommend tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg over alteplase 0.9 mg/kg (moderate evidence, strong recommendation). For patients with AIS on awakening from sleep or AIS of unknown onset who are selected with non-contrast CT, we recommend against IVT with tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg (low evidence, strong recommendation). Expert consensus statements are also provided. Tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg may be favoured over alteplase 0.9 mg/kg for patients with AIS of <4.5 h duration in view of comparable safety and efficacy data and easier administration. For patients with LVO AIS of <4.5 h duration who are IVT-eligible, IVT with tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg is preferable over skipping IVT before MT, even in the setting of a direct admission to a thrombectomy-capable centre. IVT with tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg may be a reasonable alternative to alteplase 0.9 mg/kg for patients with AIS on awakening from sleep or AIS of unknown onset and who are IVT-eligible after selection with advanced imaging.

Safety and efficacy of tenecteplase in patients with wake-up stroke assessed by non-contrast CT (TWIST): a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence supports the use of intravenous thrombolysis with alteplase in patients with wake-up stroke selected with MRI or perfusion imaging and is recommended in clinical guidelines. However, access to advanced imaging techniques is often scarce. We aimed to determine whether thrombolytic treatment with intravenous tenecteplase given within 4·5 h of awakening improves functional outcome in patients with ischaemic wake-up stroke selected using non-contrast CT. METHODS: TWIST was an investigator-initiated, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial with blinded endpoint assessment, conducted at 77 hospitals in ten countries. We included patients aged 18 years or older with acute ischaemic stroke symptoms upon awakening, limb weakness, a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score of 3 or higher or aphasia, a non-contrast CT examination of the head, and the ability to receive tenecteplase within 4·5 h of awakening. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either a single intravenous bolus of tenecteplase 0·25 mg per kg of bodyweight (maximum 25 mg) or control (no thrombolysis) using a central, web-based, computer-generated randomisation schedule. Trained research personnel, who conducted telephone interviews at 90 days (follow-up), were masked to treatment allocation. Clinical assessments were performed on day 1 (at baseline) and day 7 of hospital admission (or at discharge, whichever occurred first). The primary outcome was functional outcome assessed by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days and analysed using ordinal logistic regression in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with EudraCT (2014-000096-80), ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03181360), and ISRCTN (10601890). FINDINGS: From June 12, 2017, to Sept 30, 2021, 578 of the required 600 patients were enrolled (288 randomly assigned to the tenecteplase group and 290 to the control group [intention-to-treat population]). The median age of participants was 73·7 years (IQR 65·9-81·1). 332 (57%) of 578 participants were male and 246 (43%) were female. Treatment with tenecteplase was not associated with better functional outcome, according to mRS score at 90 days (adjusted OR 1·18, 95% CI 0·88-1·58; p=0·27). Mortality at 90 days did not significantly differ between treatment groups (28 [10%] patients in the tenecteplase group and 23 [8%] in the control group; adjusted HR 1·29, 95% CI 0·74-2·26; p=0·37). Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage occurred in six (2%) patients in the tenecteplase group versus three (1%) in the control group (adjusted OR 2·17, 95% CI 0·53-8·87; p=0·28), whereas any intracranial haemorrhage occurred in 33 (11%) versus 30 (10%) patients (adjusted OR 1·14, 0·67-1·94; p=0·64). INTERPRETATION: In patients with wake-up stroke selected with non-contrast CT, treatment with tenecteplase was not associated with better functional outcome at 90 days. The number of symptomatic haemorrhages and any intracranial haemorrhages in both treatment groups was similar to findings from previous trials of wake-up stroke patients selected using advanced imaging. Current evidence does not support treatment with tenecteplase in patients selected with non-contrast CT. FUNDING: Norwegian Clinical Research Therapy in the Specialist Health Services Programme, the Swiss Heart Foundation, the British Heart Foundation, and the Norwegian National Association for Public Health.

Statistical analysis plan for the randomized controlled trial Tenecteplase in Wake-up Ischaemic Stroke Trial (TWIST).

BACKGROUND: Patients with wake-up ischemic stroke are frequently excluded from thrombolytic treatment due to unknown symptom onset time and limited availability of advanced imaging modalities. The Tenecteplase in Wake-up Ischaemic Stroke Trial (TWIST) is a randomized controlled trial of intravenous tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg and standard care versus standard care alone (no thrombolysis) in patients who wake up with acute ischemic stroke and can be treated within 4.5 h of wakening based on non-contrast CT findings. OBJECTIVE: To publish the detailed statistical analysis plan for TWIST prior to unblinding. METHODS: The TWIST statistical analysis plan is consistent with the Consolidating Standard of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement and provides clear and open reporting. DISCUSSION: Publication of the statistical analysis plan serves to reduce potential trial reporting bias and clearly outlines the pre-specified analyses. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03181360 . EudraCT Number 2014-000096-80 . WHO ICRTP registry number ISRCTN10601890 .

Intravenous thrombolytic treatment and endovascular thrombectomy for ischaemic wake-up stroke.

BACKGROUND: About one in five strokes occur during sleep (wake-up stroke). People with wake-up strokes have previously been considered to be ineligible for thrombolytic treatment because the time of stroke onset is unknown. However, recent studies suggest benefit from recanalisation therapies in selected patients. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular thrombectomy versus control in people with acute ischaemic stroke presenting on awakening from sleep. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last search 24 of May 2021). In addition, we searched the following electronic databases in May 2021: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2021, Issue 4 of 12, April 2021) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We searched the Stroke Trials Registry (last search 7 December 2017, as the site is currently inactive). We also screened references lists of relevant trials, contacted trialists, and undertook forward tracking of relevant references. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of intravenous thrombolytic drugs or endovascular thrombectomy treatments in people with acute ischaemic stroke presenting upon awakening. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We obtained both published and unpublished data for participants with wake-up strokes. We excluded participants with strokes of unknown onset if the symptoms did not begin upon awakening. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven trials with a total of 980 participants, of which five trials with 775 participants investigated intravenous thrombolytic treatment and two trials with 205 participants investigated endovascular thrombectomy in large vessel occlusion in the anterior intracranial circulation. All trials used advanced imaging for selecting patients to treat. For intravenous thrombolytic treatment, good functional outcome (defined as modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 2) at 90 days follow-up was observed in 66% of participants randomised to thrombolytic treatment and 58% of participants randomised to control (risk ratio (RR) 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.26; P = 0.03; 763 participants, 5 RCTs; high-certainty evidence). Seven per cent of participants randomised to intravenous thrombolytic treatment and 10% of participants randomised to control had died at 90 days follow-up (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.07; P = 0.09; 763 participants, 5 RCTs; high-certainty evidence). Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage occurred in 3% of participants randomised to intravenous thrombolytic treatment and 1% of participants randomised to control (RR 3.47, 95% CI 0.98 to 12.26; P = 0.05; 754 participants, 4 RCTs; high-certainty evidence). For endovascular thrombectomy of large vessel occlusion, good functional outcome at 90 days follow-up was observed in 46% of participants randomised to endovascular thrombectomy and 9% of participants randomised to control (RR 5.12, 95% CI 2.57 to 10.17; P < 0.001; 205 participants, 2 RCTs; high-certainty evidence). Twenty-two per cent of participants randomised to endovascular thrombectomy and 33% of participants randomised to control had died at 90 days follow-up (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.07; P = 0.10; 205 participants, 2 RCTs; high-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients with acute ischaemic wake-up stroke, both intravenous thrombolytic treatment and endovascular thrombectomy of large vessel occlusion improved functional outcome without increasing the risk of death. However, a possible increased risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage associated with thrombolytic treatment cannot be ruled out. The criteria used for selecting patients to treatment differed between the trials. All studies were relatively small, and six of the seven studies were terminated early. More studies are warranted in order to determine the optimal criteria for selecting patients for treatment.

Endovascular thrombectomy and intra-arterial interventions for acute ischaemic stroke.

BACKGROUND: Most disabling strokes are due to a blockage of a large artery in the brain by a blood clot. Prompt removal of the clot with intra-arterial thrombolytic drugs or mechanical devices, or both, can restore blood flow before major brain damage has occurred, leading to improved recovery. However, these so-called endovascular interventions can cause bleeding in the brain. This is a review of randomised controlled trials of endovascular thrombectomy or intra-arterial thrombolysis, or both, for acute ischaemic stroke. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether endovascular thrombectomy or intra-arterial interventions, or both, plus medical treatment are superior to medical treatment alone in people with acute ischaemic stroke. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Trials Registers of the Cochrane Stroke Group and Cochrane Vascular Group (last searched 1 September 2020), CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library, 1 September 2020), MEDLINE (May 2010 to 1 September 2020), and Embase (May 2010 to 1 September 2020). We also searched trials registers, screened reference lists, and contacted researchers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any endovascular intervention plus medical treatment compared with medical treatment alone in people with definite ischaemic stroke. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (MBR and MJ) applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed trial quality. Two review authors (MBR and HL) assessed risk of bias, and the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We obtained both published and unpublished data if available. Our primary outcome was favourable functional outcome at the end of the scheduled follow-up period, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2. Eighteen trials (i.e. all but one included trial) reported their outcome at 90 days. Secondary outcomes were death from all causes at in the acute phase and by the end of follow-up, symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage in the acute phase and by the end of follow-up, neurological status at the end of follow-up, and degree of recanalisation. MAIN RESULTS: We included 19 studies with a total of 3793 participants. The majority of participants had large artery occlusion in the anterior circulation, and were treated within six hours of symptom onset with endovascular thrombectomy. Treatment increased the chance of achieving a good functional outcome, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2: risk ratio (RR) 1.50 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37 to 1.63; 3715 participants, 18 RCTs; high-certainty evidence). Treatment also reduced the risk of death at end of follow-up: RR 0.85 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.97; 3793 participants, 19 RCTs; high-certainty evidence) without increasing the risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage in the acute phase: RR 1.46 (95% CI 0.91 to 2.36; 1559 participants, 6 RCTs; high-certainty evidence) or by end of follow-up: RR 1.05 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.52; 1752 participants, 10 RCTs; high-certainty evidence); however, the wide confidence intervals preclude any firm conclusion. Neurological recovery to National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score 0 to 1 and degree of recanalisation rates were better in the treatment group: RR 2.03 (95% CI 1.21 to 3.40; 334 participants, 3 RCTs; high-certainty evidence) and RR 3.11 (95% CI 2.18 to 4.42; 268 participants, 3 RCTs; high-certainty evidence), respectively. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with acute ischaemic stroke due to large artery occlusion in the anterior circulation, endovascular thrombectomy can increase the chance of survival with a good functional outcome without increasing the risk of intracerebral haemorrhage or death.

Tenecteplase in wake-up ischemic stroke trial: Protocol for a randomized-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with wake-up ischemic stroke who have evidence of salvageable tissue on advanced imaging can benefit from intravenous thrombolysis. It is not known whether patients who do not fulfil such imaging criteria might benefit from treatment, but studies indicate that treatment based on non-contrast CT criteria may be safe. Tenecteplase has shown promising results in patients with acute ischemic stroke. The aim of the Tenecteplase in Wake-up Ischemic Stroke Trial (TWIST) is to compare the effect of thrombolytic treatment with tenecteplase and standard care versus standard care alone in patients with wake-up ischemic stroke selected by non-contrast CT. METHODS/DESIGN: TWIST is an international, investigator-initiated, multi-centre, prospective, randomized-controlled, open-label, blinded end-point trial of tenecteplase (n = 300) versus standard care (n = 300) in patients who wake up with an acute ischemic stroke and can be treated within 4.5 h upon awakening. Seventy-seven centres in 10 countries (Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom) participate. The primary outcome is the modified Rankin Scale on the ordinal scale (0-6) at three months. DISCUSSION: TWIST aims to determine the effect and safety of thrombolytic treatment with tenecteplase in patients with wake-up ischemic stroke selected by non-contrast CT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03181360. EudraCT Number 2014-000096-80.

Recanalisation therapies for wake-up stroke.

BACKGROUND: About one in five strokes occur during sleep (wake-up stroke). People with wake-up strokes have traditionally been considered ineligible for thrombolytic treatment because the time of stroke onset is unknown. However, some studies suggest that these people may benefit from recanalisation therapies. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of intravenous thrombolysis and other recanalisation therapies versus control in people with acute ischaemic stroke presenting on awakening. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last search: 9 January 2018). In addition, we searched the following electronic databases in December 2017: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 11) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), the ISRCTN registry, and Stroke Trials Registry. We also screened references lists of relevant trials, contacted trialists, undertook forward tracking of relevant references, and contacted manufacturers of relevant devices and equipment. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of intravenous thrombolytic drugs or intra-arterial therapies in people with acute ischaemic stroke presenting upon awakening. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed trial quality and risk of bias using the GRADE approach. We obtained both published and unpublished data. MAIN RESULTS: We included one pilot trial with nine participants. The trial was a feasibility trial that included participants with an unknown onset of stroke and signs on perfusion computed tomography of ischaemic tissue at risk of infarction, who were randomised to alteplase (0.9 mg/kg) or placebo. One trial was prematurely terminated due to signs of efficacy of the intervention arm; we did not include this trial because we were not able to obtain data for the portion of the participants with wake-up stroke after requesting this information from the trial authors. We identified six ongoing trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised controlled trials for recommendations concerning recanalisation therapies for wake-up stroke. Results from ongoing trials will hopefully establish the efficacy and safety of such therapies.

Effects of alteplase on survival after ischaemic stroke (IST-3): 3 year follow-up of a randomised, controlled, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: The effect of alteplase on patient survival after ischaemic stroke is the subject of debate. We report the effect of intravenous alteplase on long-term survival after ischaemic stroke of participants in the Third International Stroke Trial (IST-3). METHODS: In IST-3, done at 156 hospitals in 12 countries (Australia, Europe, and the UK), participants (aged >18 years) were randomly assigned with a telephone voice-activated or web-based system in a 1:1 ratio to treatment with intravenous 0·9 mg/kg alteplase plus standard care or standard care alone within 6 h of ischaemic stroke. We followed up participants in the UK and Scandinavia (Sweden and Norway) for survival up to 3 years after randomisation using data from national registries and compared survival in the two groups with proportional hazards survival analysis, adjusting for key prognostic variables. IST-3 is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN25765518. FINDINGS: Between May 5, 2000, and July 27, 2011, 3035 participants were enrolled in IST-3. Of these, 1948 (64%) of 3035 participants were scheduled for analysis of 3 year survival, and 1946 (>99%) of these were included in the analysis (967 [50%] in the alteplase plus standard care group and 979 [50%] in the standard care alone group). By 3 years after randomisation, 453 (47%) of 967 participants in the alteplase plus standard care group and 494 (50%) of 979 in the standard care alone group had died (risk difference 3·6% [95% CI -0·8 to 8·1]). Participants allocated to alteplase had a significantly higher hazard of death during the first 7 days (99 [10%] of 967 died in the alteplase plus standard care group vs 65 [7%] of 979 in the standard care alone group; hazard ratio 1·52 [95% CI 1·11-2·08]; p=0·004) and a significantly lower hazard of death between 8 days and 3 years (354 [41%] of 868 vs 429 [47%] of 914; 0·78 [0·68-0·90]; p=0·007). INTERPRETATION: Alteplase treatment within 6 h after ischaemic stroke was associated with a small, non-significant reduction in risk of death at 3 years, but among individuals who survived the acute phase, treatment was associated with a significant increase in long-term survival. These results are reassuring for clinicians who have expressed concerns about the effect of alteplase on survival. FUNDING: Heart and Stroke Scotland, UK Medical Research Council, Health Foundation UK, Stroke Association UK, Research Council of Norway, AFA Insurance, Swedish Heart Lung Fund, Foundation of Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg, Polish Ministry of Science and Education, Australian Heart Foundation, Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Swiss National Research Foundation, Swiss Heart Foundation, Assessorato alla Sanita (Regione dell'Umbria), and Danube University.