Search

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Background and Purpose: Blinded outcome assessment in trials with prospective randomized open blinded end point design is challenging. Unblinding can result in misclassified outcomes and biased treatment effect estimates. An outcome adjudication committee assures blinded outcome assessment, but the added value for trials with prospective randomized open blinded end point design and subjective outcomes is unknown. We aimed to assess the degree of misclassification of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores by a central assessor and its impact on treatment effect estimates in a stroke trial with prospective randomized open blinded end point design. Methods: We used data from the MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands). The primary outcome was the mRS at 90 days. Standardized, algorithm-based telephone interviews to assess the mRS were conducted from a central location by an experienced research nurse, unaware but not formally blinded to treatment allocation (central assessor). Masked reports of these interviews were adjudicated by a blinded outcome committee. Misclassification was defined as an incorrect classification of the mRS by the central assessor. The effect of endovascular treatment on the mRS was assessed with multivariable ordinal logistic regression. Results: In MR CLEAN, 53/500 (10.6%) of the mRS scores were misclassified. The degree and direction of misclassification did not differ between treatment arms (P=0.59). Benefit of endovascular treatment was shown on the mRS when scored by the central assessor (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.16–2.21]) and the outcome adjudication committee (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.67 [95% CI, 1.21–2.20]). Conclusions: Misclassification by the central assessor was small, randomly distributed over treatment arms, and did not affect treatment effect estimates. This study suggests that the added value of a blinded outcome adjudication committee is limited in a stroke trial with prospective randomized open blinded end point design applying standardized, algorithm-based outcome assessment by a central assessor, who is unaware but not formally blinded to treatment allocation. Registration: URL: https://www.isrctn.com; Unique identifier: ISRCTN10888758.

Background: Aneurysmal persistence after flow diversion (FD) occurs in 5% to 25% of aneurysms, which may necessitate retreatment. There are limited data on safety/efficacy of repeat FD—a frequently utilized strategy in such cases. Methods: A series of consecutive patients undergoing FD retreatment from 15 centers were reviewed (2011–2019), with inclusion criteria of repeat FD for the same aneurysm at least 6 months after initial treatment, with minimum of 6 months post-retreatment imaging. The primary outcome was aneurysmal occlusion, and secondary outcome was safety. A multivariable logistic regression model was constructed to identify predictors of incomplete occlusion (90%–99% and Results: Ninety-five patients (median age, 57 years; 81% women) harboring 95 aneurysms underwent 198 treatment procedures. Majority of aneurysms were unruptured (87.4%), saccular (74.7%), and located in the internal carotid artery (79%; median size, 9 mm). Median elapsed time between the first and second treatment was 12.2 months. Last available follow-up was at median 12.8 months after retreatment, and median 30.6 months after the initial treatment, showing complete occlusion in 46.2% and near-complete occlusion (90%–99%) in 20.4% of aneurysms. There was no difference in ischemic complications following initial treatment and retreatment (4.2% versus 4.2%; P >0.99). On multivariable regression, fusiform morphology had higher nonocclusion odds after retreatment (odds ratio [OR], 7.2 [95% CI, 1.97–20.8]). Family history of aneurysms was associated with lower odds of nonocclusion (OR, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.04–0.78]). Likewise, positive smoking history was associated with lower odds of nonocclusion (OR, 0.29 [95% CI, 0.1–0.86]). History of hypertension trended toward incomplete occlusion (OR, 3.10 [95% CI, 0.98–6.3]), similar to incorporated branch into aneurysms (OR, 2.78 [95% CI, 0.98–6.8]). Conclusions: Repeat FD for persistent aneurysms carries a reasonable success/safety profile. Satisfactory occlusion (100% and 90%–99% occlusion) was encountered in two-thirds of patients, with similar complications between the initial and subsequent retreatments. Fusiform morphology was the strongest predictor of retreatment failure.

Background and Purpose— High blood pressure (BP) is associated with poor outcome and the occurrence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage in acute ischemic stroke. Whether BP influences the benefit or safety of intra-arterial treatment (IAT) is not known. We aimed to assess the relation of BP with functional outcome, occurrence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and effect of IAT. Methods— This is a post hoc analysis of the MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands). BP was measured at baseline, before IAT or stroke unit admission. We estimated the association of baseline BP with the score on the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days and safety parameters with ordinal and logistic regression analysis. Effect of BP on the effect of IAT was tested with multiplicative interaction terms. Results— Systolic BP (SBP) had the best correlation with functional outcome. This correlation was U-shaped; both low and high baseline SBP were associated with poor functional outcome. Higher SBP was associated with symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (adjusted odds ratio, 1.25 for every 10 mm Hg higher SBP [95% confidence interval, 1.09–1.44]). Between SBP and IAT, there was no interaction for functional outcome, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, or other safety parameters; the absolute benefit of IAT was evident for the whole SBP range. The same was found for diastolic BP. Conclusions— BP does not affect the benefit or safety of IAT in patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by proximal intracranial vessel occlusion. Our data provide no arguments to withhold or delay IAT based on BP. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.isrctn.com . Unique identifier: ISRCTN10888758.

Background and Purpose— A high clot burden score (CBS) is associated with favorable outcome after intravenous treatment for acute ischemic stroke. The added benefit of intra-arterial treatment might be less in these patients. The aim of this exploratory post hoc analysis was to assess the relation of CBS with neurological improvement and endovascular treatment effect. Methods— For 499 of 500 patients in the MR CLEAN study (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands), the CBS was determined. Ordinal logistic regression models with and without main baseline prognostic variables were used to assess the association between CBS (continuous or dichotomized at CBS of 6) and a shift toward better outcome on the modified Rankin Scale. The model without main baseline prognostic variables only included treatment allocation and CBS. Models with and without a multiplicative interaction term of CBS and treatment were compared using the χ 2 test to assess treatment effect modification by CBS. Results— Higher CBS was associated with a shift toward better outcome on the modified Rankin Scale; adjusted common odds ratio per point CBS was 1.12 (95% confidence interval, 1.04–1.20]. Dichotomized CBS had an adjusted common odds ratio of 1.67 (95% confidence interval, 1.12–2.51). Both effect estimates were slightly attenuated by adding baseline prognostic variables. The addition of the interaction terms did not significantly improve the fit of the models. There was a small and insignificant increase of intra-arterial treatment efficacy in the high CBS group. Conclusions— A higher CBS is associated with improved outcome and may be used as a prognostic marker. We found no evidence that CBS modifies the effect of intra-arterial treatment. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.trialregister.nl . Unique identifier: NTR1804. URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com . Unique identifier: ISRCTN10888758.

Background and Purpose— Recent randomized trials have proven the benefit of intra-arterial treatment (IAT) with retrievable stents in acute ischemic stroke. Patients with poor or absent collaterals (preexistent anastomoses to maintain blood flow in case of a primary vessel occlusion) may gain less clinical benefit from IAT. In this post hoc analysis, we aimed to assess whether the effect of IAT was modified by collateral status on baseline computed tomographic angiography in the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN). Methods— MR CLEAN was a multicenter, randomized trial of IAT versus no IAT. Primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days. The primary effect parameter was the adjusted common odds ratio for a shift in direction of a better outcome on the modified Rankin Scale. Collaterals were graded from 0 (absent) to 3 (good). We used multivariable ordinal logistic regression analysis with interaction terms to estimate treatment effect modification by collateral status. Results— We found a significant modification of treatment effect by collaterals ( P =0.038). The strongest benefit (adjusted common odds ratio 3.2 [95% confidence intervals 1.7–6.2]) was found in patients with good collaterals (grade 3). The adjusted common odds ratio was 1.6 [95% confidence intervals 1.0–2.7] for moderate collaterals (grade 2), 1.2 [95% confidence intervals 0.7–2.3] for poor collaterals (grade 1), and 1.0 [95% confidence intervals 0.1–8.7] for patients with absent collaterals (grade 0). Conclusions— In MR CLEAN, baseline computed tomographic angiography collateral status modified the treatment effect. The benefit of IAT was greatest in patients with good collaterals on baseline computed tomographic angiography. Treatment benefit appeared less and may be absent in patients with absent or poor collaterals. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.trialregister.nl and http://www.controlled-trials.com . Unique identifier: (NTR)1804 and ISRCTN10888758, respectively.

Background and Purpose— Intra-arterial treatment (IAT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) can be performed with or without general anesthesia (GA). Previous studies suggested that IAT without the use of GA (non-GA) is associated with better clinical outcome. Nevertheless, no consensus exists about the anesthetic management during IAT of AIS patients. This study investigates the association between type of anesthesia and clinical outcome in a large cohort of patients with AIS treated with IAT. Methods— All consecutive patients with AIS of the anterior circulation who received IAT between 2002 and 2013 in 16 Dutch hospitals were included in the study. Primary outcome was functional outcome on the modified Rankin Scale at discharge. Difference in primary outcome between GA and non-GA was estimated using multiple ordinal regression analysis, adjusting for age, stroke severity, occlusion of the internal carotid artery terminus, previous stroke, atrial fibrillation, and diabetes mellitus. Results— Three hundred forty-eight patients were included in the analysis; 70 patients received GA and 278 patients did not receive GA. Non-GA was significantly associated with good clinical outcome (odds ratio 2.1, 95% confidence interval 1.02–4.31). After adjusting for prespecified prognostic factors, the point estimate remained similar; statistical significance, however, was lost (odds ratio 1.9, 95% confidence interval 0.89–4.24). Conclusions— Our study suggests that patients with AIS of the anterior circulation undergoing IAT without GA have a higher probability of good clinical outcome compared with patients treated with general anesthesia.