Search

Cancer-related stroke (CRS), referring to ischemic stroke occurring in cancer patients without other clear etiology, represents a clinical challenge, as it is associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes including high rates of recurrence and mortality. There are scarce international recommendations and limited consensus statements on CRS management. For this comprehensive overview, the available studies/reviews/meta-analyses on the use of acute reperfusion and secondary prevention treatments for cancer patients with ischemic stroke, focusing on antithrombotic agents, were collected and summarized. A practical management algorithm was designed per the available data. In short, acute reperfusion in the form of intravenous thrombolysis and mechanical thrombectomy appears to be safe in CRS and can be considered for eligible patients, though the functional outcomes are often poor, and mostly defined by the preexisting condition. Many patients carry indications for anticoagulation, in which case vitamin K antagonists are not preferred, while low-molecular weight heparins remain the treatment of choice; direct oral anticoagulants can be alternatively considered but are contraindicated for gastrointestinal malignancies. For patients without clear anticoagulation indications, no net benefit for anticoagulation compared to aspirin has been shown. Other targeted treatment options should be evaluated in an individualized approach, alongside the appropriate management of conventional cerebrovascular risk factors. Oncological treatment should be swiftly initiated/continued. In conclusion, acute CRS remains a clinical challenge, with many patients suffering recurrent stroke, despite preventive measures. More randomized-controlled clinical trials are urgently needed to pinpoint the most effective management options for this subset of stroke patients., Competing Interests: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s), 2023.)

Background: Many countries worldwide reported side effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic that have influenced the care of patients with other diseases in both acute and elective settings. Patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) represent the major patient population suffering from an autoimmune inflammatory demyelinating disease of the central nervous system. We aimed to analyze MS and NMOSD hospitalizations, the application of plasmapheresis therapy, and the dynamic during different periods of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany., Methods: We conducted a nationwide retrospective cross-sectional study using the administrative database of all hospitalized patients with the main diagnosis of MS and NMOSD, including the information on the application of plasmapheresis therapy. We included full-year data from 1463 hospitals of all MS and NMOSD patients hospitalized in 2019 and 2020 in Germany ( n  = 87,453). We compared case numbers and plasmapheresis therapy rates of the different pandemic periods in 2020 with the corresponding periods in 2019., Results: We observed a substantial decline of MS and NMOSD patients' hospitalizations during the different pandemic periods, with the most remarkable decline during the first wave of the pandemic (First diagnosis of MS: -16.8%; relapsing-remitting MS: -34.0%; secondary progressive MS: -48.9%; primary progressive MS: -43.8%; NMOSD: -19.2%). Treatment rates with plasmapheresis increased for MS and NMOSD patients in 2020 compared to 2019 (1.8% versus 1.6%, p  = 0.003; 14.0% versus 9.3%, p  < 0.001), with a substantial increase during the first wave of the pandemic, especially in NMOSD patients (19.7% versus 8.4%, p  < 0.001)., Conclusion: There was a marked decline of MS and NMOSD patients' hospitalizations during the different pandemic periods in 2020, with the most substantial reduction during the pandemic's first wave and in progressive MS patients. MS and NMOSD patients who needed rescue relapse treatment continued to receive plasmapheresis therapy in Germany., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: Daniel Richter: receives support from the Medical Faculty of Ruhr-University Bochum (FoRUM grant K136-20). Simon Faissner: received speaker’s and/or board honoraria from Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Novartis and Roche and grant support from Ruhr-University Bochum, DMSG, Stiftung für therapeutische Forschung and Novartis, none related to this work. Dirk Bartig: received orders for analysis of the German Diagnosis-Related Groups system from Boehringer Ingelheim and Sanofi Aventis. Lars Tönges: LT has received travel funding and/or speaker honoraria from Abbvie, Bayer, Bial, Desitin, GE, UCB, Zambon and consulted for Abbvie, Bayer, Bial, Desitin, Stadapharm, UCB, Zambon in the last three years. Kerstin Hellwig: received speaker’s and/or research support from Biogen, Bayer, Teva, Sanofi Genzyme, Novartis, and Roche and grant support from the Innovation Fond, DMSG and DFG, all not related to this work. Ilya Ayzenberg: has received travel grants and speaker honoraria from Biogen Idec and Guthy-Jackson Charitable Foundation, Alexion, Santhera, Merck, served on scientific advisory boards for Roche and Alexion, and received research support from Diamed, none related to this study. Christos Krogias: received speaker honoraria or travel grants for scientific meetings from Bayer Vital and Daichii Sankyo. Ralf Gold: serves on scientific advisory boards for Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Biogen Idec, Bayer Schering Pharma, and Novartis; has received speaker honoraria from Biogen Idec, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Bayer Schering Pharma, and Novartis; serves as editor for Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Diseases and on the editorial boards of Experimental Neurology and the Journal of Neuroimmunology; and receives research support from Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Biogen Idec, Bayer Schering Pharma, Genzyme, Merck Serono, and Novartis, none related to this manuscript. Ralf Gold is the Editor-in-Chief of Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders; therefore, the peer review process was managed by alternative members of the Board and the submitting Editor was not involved in the decision-making process., (© The Author(s), 2021.)

Recent randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have revolutionized acute ischemic stroke care by extending the use of intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular reperfusion therapies in time windows that have been originally considered futile or even unsafe. Both systemic and endovascular reperfusion therapies have been shown to improve outcome in patients with wake-up strokes or symptom onset beyond 4.5 h for intravenous thrombolysis and beyond 6 h for endovascular treatment; however, they require advanced neuroimaging to select stroke patients safely. Experts have proposed simpler imaging algorithms but high-quality data on safety and efficacy are currently missing. RCTs used diverse imaging and clinical inclusion criteria for patient selection during the dawn of this novel stroke treatment paradigm. After taking into consideration the dismal prognosis of nonrecanalized ischemic stroke patients and the substantial clinical benefit of reperfusion therapies in selected late presenters, we propose rescue reperfusion therapies for acute ischemic stroke patients not fulfilling all clinical and imaging inclusion criteria as an option in a subgroup of patients with clinical and radiological profiles suggesting low risk for complications, notably hemorrhagic transformation as well as local or remote parenchymal hemorrhage. Incorporating new data to treatment algorithms may seem perplexing to stroke physicians, since treatment and imaging capabilities of each stroke center may dictate diverse treatment pathways. This narrative review will summarize current data that will assist clinicians in the selection of those late presenters that will most likely benefit from acute reperfusion therapies. Different treatment algorithms are provided according to available neuroimaging and endovascular treatment capabilities., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s), 2021.)

Neurological manifestations are not uncommon during infection with the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). A clear association has been reported between cerebrovascular disease and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, whether this association is causal or incidental is still unknown. In this narrative review, we sought to present the possible pathophysiological mechanisms linking COVID-19 and cerebrovascular disease, describe the stroke syndromes and their prognosis and discuss several clinical, radiological, and laboratory characteristics that may aid in the prompt recognition of cerebrovascular disease during COVID-19. A systematic literature search was conducted, and relevant information was abstracted. Angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 receptor dysregulation, uncontrollable immune reaction and inflammation, coagulopathy, COVID-19-associated cardiac injury with subsequent cardio-embolism, complications due to critical illness and prolonged hospitalization can all contribute as potential etiopathogenic mechanisms leading to diverse cerebrovascular clinical manifestations. Acute ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis have been described in case reports and cohorts of COVID-19 patients with a prevalence ranging between 0.5% and 5%. SARS-CoV-2-positive stroke patients have higher mortality rates, worse functional outcomes at discharge and longer duration of hospitalization as compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative stroke patients in different cohort studies. Specific demographic, clinical, laboratory and radiological characteristics may be used as 'red flags' to alarm clinicians in recognizing COVID-19-related stroke., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s), 2020.)

In 2014, the definition of embolic strokes of undetermined source (ESUS) emerged as a new clinical construct to characterize cryptogenic stroke (CS) patients with complete vascular workup to determine nonlacunar, nonatherosclerotic strokes of presumable embolic origin. NAVIGATE ESUS, the first phase III randomized-controlled, clinical trial (RCT) comparing rivaroxaban (15 mg daily) with aspirin (100 mg daily), was prematurely terminated for lack of efficacy after enrollment of 7213 patients. Except for the lack of efficacy in the primary outcome, rivaroxaban was associated with increased risk of major bleeding and hemorrhagic stroke compared with aspirin. RE-SPECT ESUS was the second phase III RCT that compared the efficacy and safety of dabigatran (110 or 150 mg, twice daily) to aspirin (100 mg daily). The results of this trial have been recently presented and showed similar efficacy and safety outcomes between dabigatran and aspirin. Indirect analyses of these trials suggest similar efficacy on the risk of ischemic stroke (IS) prevention, but higher intracranial hemorrhage risk in ESUS patients receiving rivaroxaban compared to those receiving dabigatran (indirect HR = 6.63, 95% CI: 1.38-31.76). ESUS constitute a heterogeneous group of patients with embolic cerebral infarction. Occult AF represents the underlying mechanism of cerebral ischemia in the minority of ESUS patients. Other embolic mechanisms (paradoxical embolism via patent foramen ovale, aortic plaque, nonstenosing unstable carotid plaque, etc.) may represent alternative mechanisms of cerebral embolism in ESUS, and may mandate different management than oral anticoagulation. The potential clinical utility of ESUS may be challenged since the concept failed to identify patients who would benefit from anticoagulation therapy. Compared with the former diagnosis of CS, ESUS patients required thorough investigations; more comprehensive diagnostic work-up than is requested in current ESUS diagnostic criteria may assist clinicians in uncovering the source of brain embolism in CS patients and individualize treatment approaches., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Background: After thrombectomy has shown to be effective in acute stroke patients with large vessel occlusion, the potential benefit of secondary referral for such an intervention needs to be validated., Aims: We aimed to compare consecutive stoke patients directly admitted and treated with thrombectomy at a neurointerventional centre with patients secondarily referred for such a procedure from hospitals with a stroke unit., Methods: Periprocedure times and mortality in 300 patients primarily treated in eight neurointerventional centres were compared with 343 patients referred from nine other hospitals in a prospective multicentre study of a German neurovascular network. Data on functional outcome at 3 months was available in 430 (76.4%) patients., Results: In-hospital mortality (14.8% versus 11.7%, p = 0.26) and 3 months mortality (21.9% versus 24.1%, p = 0.53) were not statistically different in both patient groups despite a significant shorter symptom to groin puncture time in directly admitted patients, which was mainly caused by a longer interfacility transfer time. We found a nonsignificant trend for better functional outcome at 3 months in directly admitted patients (modified Rankin Scale 0-2, 44.0% versus 35.7%, p = 0.08)., Conclusions: Our results show that a drip-and-ship thrombectomy concept can be effectively organized in a metropolitan stroke network. Every effort should be made to speed up the emergency interfacility transfer to a neurointerventional centre in stroke patients eligible for thrombectomy after initial brain imaging.

Objectives: Therapeutic options in progressive forms of multiple sclerosis (MS) are still limited. Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) has immunomodulatory properties but may also exert antioxidative cytoprotective effects. Hence, it may be a therapeutic option for progressive MS. The aim of this observational study was to evaluate safety, adherence and efficacy of fumarates in patients with primary progressive MS (PPMS) or secondary progressive MS., Methods: Patients with progressive MS whose condition had failed to respond to standard therapies and had worsened received the fumarate mixture Fumaderm, licensed for psoriasis therapy in Germany, or DMF by pharmaceutical preparation (Bochum ethics approval no. 4797-13). At regular follow-up visits, tolerability and disease course were assessed., Results: Twenty-six patients [age 54 ± 7.8 years; female = 13 (50%); PPMS = 12 (46.2%); Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) = 6.0 ± 0.4 (range 3.5-8.0); disease duration = 14.1 ± 8.7 years] were initiated on treatment with Fumaderm (n = 18) or pharmacy-prepared DMF (n=8). During a mean follow-up period of 13.2 ± 7.5 months (range 6-30) only five patients (19.2%) reported minor complaints. In 15 patients (57.7%) EDSS remained stable. In five cases (19.2%) there was even a decrease in EDSS while in six patients (23.1%) there was an increase in EDSS of more than 0.5 points, reflecting deterioration. Laboratory values were controlled for lymphopenia, renal and hepatic values, without any safety problems. We observed no significant differences between the two pharmaceutical forms., Conclusion: Our pilot data indicate that fumarate therapy appears to be safe and well tolerated by patients with progressive MS. In more than 75% of cases no further disease progression was evident. However, controlled studies are warranted to evaluate the detailed therapeutic potential of fumarates and their long-term effects in progressive MS.

Background: There are growing concerns for the side effects of dabigatran etexilate (dabigatran), including higher incidence of dyspepsia and gastrointestinal bleeding. We conducted a multicenter early implementation study to prospectively evaluate the safety, efficacy and adherence to dabigatran for secondary stroke prevention., Methods: Consecutive atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with ischemic stroke (IS) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) received dabigatran for secondary stroke prevention during their hospital stay according to American Heart Association recommendations at five tertiary care stroke centers. The study population was prospectively followed and outcomes were documented. The primary and secondary safety outcomes were major hemorrhage and all other bleeding events respectively defined according to RE-LY trial methodology., Results: A total of 78 AF patients (mean age 71 ± 9years; 54% men; 81% IS, 19% TIA; median CHADS2 (Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, diabetes mellitus, age >75 years, prior stroke or TIA); range 2-5) score 4 were treated with dabigatran [(110mg bid (74%); 150mg bid (26%)]. During a mean follow-up period of 7 ± 5 months (range 1-18) we documented no cases of IS, TIA, intracranial hemorrhage, systemic embolism or myocardial infarction in AF patients treated with dabigatran. There were two (2.6%) major bleeding events (lower gastrointestinal bleeding) and two (2.6%) minor bleedings [hematuria (n = 1) and rectal bleeding (n = 1)]. Dabigatran was discontinued in 26% of the study population with high cost being the most common reason for discontinuation (50%)., Discussion: Our pilot data indicate that dabigatran appears to be safe for secondary stroke prevention during the first year of implementation of this therapy. However, high cost may limit the long-term treatment of AF patients with dabigatran, leading to early discontinuation.

Objectives: Chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI) has recently been implicated in the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis (MS). This comprehensive meta-analysis of case-control studies investigates the association of CCSVI with MS., Methods: Through Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane database searches, case-control ultrasound studies comparing CCSVI frequency among patients with MS and healthy controls were identified., Results: We identified 19 eligible studies including 1250 patients with MS and 899 healthy controls. The pooled analysis showed that CCSVI was associated with MS [odds ratio (OR) 8.35; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.44-20.31; p < 0.001) with considerable heterogeneity across studies (I (2) = 80.1%). This association was substantially attenuated in sensitivity analyses excluding studies that were carried out by the group that originally described CCSVI, included investigators who had also been involved in publications advocating endovascular procedures for CCSVI treatment, or were conducted in Italy. Our most conservative sensitivity analysis combining different exclusion criteria yielded no association of CCSVI with MS (OR 1.35; 95% CI 0.62-2.93; p = 0.453) without any heterogeneity (I (2) = 0%)., Conclusion: There is considerable heterogeneity across different case-control studies evaluating the association of CCSVI and MS. The greatest factor contributing to this heterogeneity appears to be the involvement of investigators in other publications supporting endovascular procedures as a novel MS treatment.

Autonomic dysfunction is a characteristic of migraine attacks, rarely, even cardiac repolarization abnormalities have been associated with migraine. We report a case of documented ventricular tachycardia during basilar-type migraine attack. The therapeutic implications of such a co-occurrence as well as a possible relationship between ventricular tachycardia and the underlying biology of basilar-type migraine are discussed.

Background: Magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is supposed to be the new 'gold standard' in the diagnosis of atherosclerotic disease of the extracranial arteries., Methods: A case report is presented on a patient in whom discordant findings of the status of the left internal carotid artery (ICA) were identified in color-coded duplex-sonography and MRA., Results: Left ICA stenosis was suspected in duplex-sonography, yet not confirmed in contrast-enhanced (CE) MRA reconstruction. Diagnosis was confirmed after surgery and in subsequent analysis of the original CE-MRI data., Conclusions: The analysis of source images must not be missed in MRA examinations. Conventional duplex-sonography may be superior in the estimation of the embolic potential of vascular lesions. Advanced CE techniques may therefore be adequate tools in differentiating patients eligible for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid stenting, avoiding the risk of peri-interventional iatrogenic complications. It should urgently be further improved and validated.