Search

Introduction: Rapid treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) depends on sufficient staffing which differs between Stroke Centers and Stroke Units in Switzerland. We studied the effect of admission time on performance measures of AIS treatment and related temporal trends over time. Patients and methods: We compared treatment rates, door-to-image-time, door-to-needle-time, and door-to-groin-puncture-time in stroke patients admitted during office hours (Monday–Friday 8:00–17:59) and non-office hours at all certified Stroke Centers and Stroke Units in Switzerland, as well as secular trends thereof between 2014 and 2019, using data from the Swiss Stroke Registry. Secondary outcomes were modified Rankin Scale and mortality at 3 months. Results: Data were eligible for analysis in 31,788 (90.2%) of 35,261 patients. Treatment rates for IVT/EVT were higher during non-office hours compared with office hours in Stroke Centers (40.8 vs 36.5%) and Stroke Units (21.8 vs 18.5%). Door-to-image-time and door-to-needle-time increased significantly during non-office hours. Median (IQR) door-to-groin-puncture-time at Stroke Centers was longer during non-office hours compared to office hours (84 (59–116) vs 95 (66–130) minutes). Admission during non-office hours was independently associated with worse functional outcome (1.11 [95%CI: 1.04–1.18]) and increased mortality (1.13 [95%CI: 1.01–1.27]). From 2014 to 2019, median door-to-groin-puncture-time improved and the treatment rate for wake-up strokes increased. Discussion and Conclusion: Despite differences in staffing, patient admission during non-office hours delayed IVT to a similar, modest degree at Stroke Centers and Stroke Units. A larger delay of EVT was observed during non-office hours, but Stroke Centers sped up delivery of EVT over time. Patients admitted during non-office hours had worse functional outcomes, which was not explained by treatment delays.

Background: Ischaemic stroke may occur despite antiplatelet therapy (APT). We aimed to investigate frequency, potential causes and outcomes in patients with ischaemic stroke despite APT. Methods: In this cohort study, we enrolled patients with imaging-confirmed ischaemic stroke from the Swiss Stroke Registry (01/2014-07/2022). We determined the frequency of prior APT, assessed stroke aetiology (modified TOAST classification) and determined the association of prior APT with unfavourable functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 3–6) and recurrent ischaemic stroke at 3 months using regression models. Results: Among 53,352 patients, 27,484 (51.5%) had no prior antithrombotic treatment, 17,760 (33.3%) were on APT, 7039 (13.2%) on anticoagulation and 1069 (2.0%) were on APT + anticoagulation. In patients with a history of ischaemic stroke/TIA ( n = 11,948; 22.4%), 2401 (20.1%) had no prior antithrombotic therapy, 6594 (55.2%) were on APT, 2489 (20.8%) on anticoagulation and 464 (3.9%) on APT + anticoagulation. Amongst patients with ischaemic stroke despite APT, aetiology was large artery atherosclerosis in 19.8% ( n = 3416), cardiac embolism in 23.6% ( n = 4059), small vessel disease in 11.7% ( n = 2011), other causes in 7.4% ( n = 1267), more than one cause in 6.3% ( n = 1078) and unknown cause in 31.3% ( n = 5388). Prior APT was not independently associated with unfavourable outcome (aOR = 1.06; 95% CI: 0.98–1.14; p = 0.135) or death (aOR = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.99–1.21; p = 0.059) at 3-months but with increased odds of recurrent stroke (6.0% vs 4.3%; aOR 1.26; 95% CI: 1.11–1.44; p Conclusions: One-third of ischaemic strokes occurred despite APT and 20% of patients with a history of ischaemic stroke had no antithrombotic therapy when having stroke recurrence. Aetiology of breakthrough strokes despite APT is heterogeneous and these patients are at increased risk of recurrent stroke.

Aims To ascertain the degree of awareness of stroke risk factors, response in case of symptoms as well as the knowledge of stroke treatments in a local Swiss population.MethodsA cross-sectional survey questionnaire-based study using a validated stroke awareness questionnaire. Enrollment was done over six months including patients who had suffered a stroke or a transient ischemic attack (TIA). Results69 patients were included, of whom 35% (n=24) correctly defined a TIA and only 29% (n=20) considered a TIA to be equally serious as a stroke. There was a statistically significant positive relationship (p=0.006, 95% CI: 0.1-0.53, r =0.3) between interpretation of stroke and TIA as a serious event. 56.5% (n=39) of patients were able to correctly identify a minimum of 3 stroke symptoms and 47.8% (n=32) patients responded that they would call an ambulance immediately at symptom onset. The decision to call an ambulance was significantly associated with a good knowledge of stroke risk factors (p=0.03, 95% CI: 1.09-9.92) and stroke therapies (p=0.05, 95% CI: 0.99 -7.36). 37% (n=26) of patients were able to cite 3 or more acute stroke therapies or secondary treatment medications and only 8.7% (n=6) were able to name thrombolysis as being one of these therapies.ConclusionsKnowledge of stroke risk factors and treatments significantly influences the immediate response to stroke symptoms. Patients who recognise a stroke as a serious medical emergency are more likely to consider a TIA to be the same. Knowledge of acute stroke treatments should be emphasised in future public health programs.

Most case series of patients with ischemic stroke (IS) and COVID-19 are limited to selected centers or lack 3-month outcomes. The aim of this study was to describe the frequency, clinical and radiological features, and 3-month outcomes of patients with IS and COVID-19 in a nationwide stroke registry. From the Swiss Stroke Registry (SSR), we included all consecutive IS patients ≥18 years admitted to Swiss Stroke Centers or Stroke Units during the first wave of COVID-19 (25 February to 8 June 2020). We compared baseline features, etiology, and 3-month outcome of SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction-positive (PCR+) IS patients to SARS-CoV-2 PCR- and/or asymptomatic non-tested IS patients. Of the 2341 IS patients registered in the SSR during the study period, 36 (1.5%) had confirmed COVID-19 infection, of which 33 were within 1 month before or after stroke onset. In multivariate analysis, COVID+ patients had more lesions in multiple vascular territories (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.08-5.14, p = 0.032) and fewer cryptogenic strokes (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.99, p = 0.049). COVID-19 was judged the likely principal cause of stroke in 8 patients (24%), a contributing/triggering factor in 12 (36%), and likely not contributing to stroke in 13 patients (40%). There was a strong trend towards worse functional outcome in COVID+ patients after propensity score (PS) adjustment for age, stroke severity, and revascularization treatments (PS-adjusted common OR for shift towards higher modified Rankin Scale (mRS) = 1.85, 95% CI 0.96-3.58, p = 0.07). In this nationwide analysis of consecutive ischemic strokes, concomitant COVID-19 was relatively rare. COVID+ patients more often had multi-territory stroke and less often cryptogenic stroke, and their 3-month functional outcome tended to be worse.