Endovascular thrombectomy and medical therapy versus medical therapy alone in acute stroke: A randomized care trial.

BACKGROUND: Until recently, the benefits of endovascular treatment in stroke were not proven. Care trials have been designed to simultaneously offer yet-to-be validated interventions and verify treatment outcomes. Our aim was to implement a care trial for patients with acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: The study was offered to all patients considered for endovascular management of acute ischemic stroke in one Canadian hospital. Inclusion criteria were broad: onset of symptoms≤5h or at any time in the presence of clinical-imaging mismatch and suspected or demonstrated proximal large vessel occlusion. Exclusion criteria were few: established infarction or hemorrhagic transformation of the target symptomatic territory and poor 3-month prognosis. The primary outcome was mRS≤2 at 3 months. Patients were randomly allocated to standard care or standard care plus endovascular treatment. ClinicalTrials.gov: Identifier NCT02157532. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were recruited in 19 months (March 2013-October 2014) at a single center. Randomized allocation was interrupted when other trials showed the benefits of endovascular therapy. At 3 months, 20 of 40 patients (50.0%; 95% CI: 35%-65%) in the intervention group had reached the primary outcome, compared to 14 of 37 patients (37.8%; 95% CI: 24%-54%) in the control group (P=0.36). Eleven patients in the intervention group died within 3 months compared to 9 patients in the standard care group. CONCLUSION: A care trial was implemented to offer verifiable care to acute stroke patients. This approach offers a promising means to manage clinical dilemmas and guide uncertain practices.

Linking brain stroke risk factors to human movement features for the development of preventive tools.

This paper uses human movement analyses to assess the susceptibility of brain stroke, one of the most important causes of disability in elders. To that end, a computerized battery of nine neuromuscular tests has been designed and evaluated with a sample of 120 subjects with or without stoke risk factors. The kinematics of the movements produced was analyzed using a computational neuromuscular model and predictive characteristics were extracted. Logistic regression and linear discriminant analysis with leave-one-out cross-validation was used to infer the probability of presence of brain stroke risk factors. The clinical potential value of movement information for stroke prevention was assessed by computing area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for the diagnostic of risk factors based on motion analysis. AUC mostly varying between 0.6 and 0.9 were obtained, depending on the neuromuscular test and the risk factor investigated (obesity, diabetes, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, cigarette smoking, and cardiac disease). Our results support the feasibility of the proposed methodology and its potential application for the development of brain stroke prevention tools. Although further research is needed to improve this methodology and its outcome, results are promising and the proposed approach should be of great interest for many experimenters open to novel approaches in preventive medicine and in gerontology. It should also be valuable for engineers, psychologists, and researchers using human movements for the development of diagnostic and neuromuscular assessment tools.

The YOU CALL-WE CALL randomized clinical trial: Impact of a multimodal support intervention after a mild stroke.

BACKGROUND: Comparison of a multimodal intervention WE CALL (study initiated phone support/information provision) versus a passive intervention YOU CALL (participant can contact a resource person) in individuals with first mild stroke. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study is a single-blinded randomized clinical trial. Primary outcome includes unplanned use of health services (participant diaries) for adverse events and quality of life (Euroquol-5D, Quality of Life Index). Secondary outcomes include planned use of health services (diaries), mood (Beck Depression Inventory II), and participation (Assessment of Life Habits [LIFE-H]). Blind assessments were done at baseline, 6, and 12 months. A mixed model approach for statistical analysis on an intention-to-treat basis was used where the group factor was intervention type and occasion factor time, with a significance level of 0.01. We enrolled 186 patients (WE=92; YOU=94) with a mean age of 62.5 ± 12.5 years, and 42.5% were women. No significant differences were seen between groups at 6 months for any outcomes with both groups improving from baseline on all measures (effect sizes ranged from 0.25 to 0.7). The only significant change for both groups from 6 months to 1 year (n=139) was in the social domains of the LIFE-H (increment in score, 0.4/9 ± 1.3 [95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.7]; effect size, 0.3). Qualitatively, the WE CALL intervention was perceived as reassuring, increased insight, and problem solving while decreasing anxiety. Only 6 of 94 (6.4%) YOU CALL participants availed themselves of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Although the 2 groups improved equally over time, WE CALL intervention was perceived as helpful, whereas YOU CALL intervention was not used. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN95662526.

Study protocol of the YOU CALL--WE CALL TRIAL: impact of a multimodal support intervention after a "mild" stroke.

BACKGROUND: More than 60% of new strokes each year are "mild" in severity and this proportion is expected to rise in the years to come. Within our current health care system those with "mild" stroke are typically discharged home within days, without further referral to health or rehabilitation services other than advice to see their family physician. Those with mild stroke often have limited access to support from health professionals with stroke-specific knowledge who would typically provide critical information on topics such as secondary stroke prevention, community reintegration, medication counselling and problem solving with regard to specific concerns that arise. Isolation and lack of knowledge may lead to a worsening of health problems including stroke recurrence and unnecessary and costly health care utilization.The purpose of this study is to assess the effectiveness, for individuals who experience a first "mild" stroke, of a sustainable, low cost, multimodal support intervention (comprising information, education and telephone support)--"WE CALL" compared to a passive intervention (providing the name and phone number of a resource person available if they feel the need to)--"YOU CALL", on two primary outcomes: unplanned-use of health services for negative events and quality of life. METHOD/DESIGN: We will recruit 384 adults who meet inclusion criteria for a first mild stroke across six Canadian sites. Baseline measures will be taken within the first month after stroke onset. Participants will be stratified according to comorbidity level and randomised to one of two groups: YOU CALL or WE CALL. Both interventions will be offered over a six months period. Primary outcomes include unplanned use of heath services for negative event (frequency calendar) and quality of life (EQ-5D and Quality of Life Index). Secondary outcomes include participation level (LIFE-H), depression (Beck Depression Inventory II) and use of health services for health promotion or prevention (frequency calendar). Blind assessors will gather data at mid-intervention, end of intervention and one year follow up. DISCUSSION: If effective, this multimodal intervention could be delivered in both urban and rural environments. For example, existing infrastructure such as regional stroke centers and existing secondary stroke prevention clinics, make this intervention, if effective, deliverable and sustainable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN95662526.