Search

Background: There is paucity of data on the long-term outcomes after acute ischemic posterior circulation stroke (PCS). Additionally, the long-term prognostic value of the New England Medical Center-Posterior Circulation Registry (NEMC-PCR) classification of PCS has not been studied., Patients and Methods: All consecutive patients with PCS registered in the Athens Stroke Registry between 01/1993 and 12/2012 were prospectively followed for up to 10 years and included in the analysis. The NEMC-PCR criteria were applied to classify them in relation to topography. The main studied outcomes were all cause mortality, stroke recurrence and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs)., Results: A total of 653 patients with PCS (455 men, mean age 68.06 years) were followed up for 52.8 ± 44.0 months. Seventy-four (11.3%), 219 (33.5%), 335 (51.3%), and 25 (3.8%) patients had proximal, middle, distal, and multiple territories PCS, respectively. During the 10-year follow-up period, 217 patients died (7.6 per 100 patient years), 127 developed recurrent stroke (4.2 per 100 patient years), and 209 had a MACE (7.3 per 100 patient years). The cumulative 10-year mortality was higher in distal and multiple territories PCS compared to middle and proximal PCS (55.6%, 58.8%, 40.0%, 35.5%, respectively, p  < 0.001 by log-rank test). Patients with distal location PCS had almost twofold increased 10-year risk of mortality compared to proximal location patients after adjusting for all confounding variables (HR 1.99, 95% CI 1.05-3.77). Per TOAST classification, large artery atherosclerosis was associated with almost two-fold increase in risk of mortality, stroke recurrence and MACEs., Discussion and Conclusion: A large proportion of PCS patients experienced 10-year death, stroke and MACE occurrence after PCS. NEMC-PCR topographic classification was found to have significant prognostic value, with distal and middle PCS having worse long-term outcomes than proximal PCS., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is frequently identified in young patients with cryptogenic ischaemic stroke. Potential stroke mechanisms include paradoxical embolism from a venous clot which traverses the PFO, in situ clot formation within the PFO, and atrial arrhythmias due to electrical signalling disruption. The purpose of this guideline is to provide recommendations for diagnosing, treating, and long-term managing patients with ischaemic stroke and PFO. Conversely, Transient Ischaemic Attack (TIA) was not considered an index event in this context because only one RCT involved TIA patients. However, this subgroup analysis showed no significant differences between TIA and stroke outcomes. The working group identified questions and outcomes, graded evidence, and developed recommendations following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and the European Stroke Organisation (ESO) standard operating procedure for guideline development. This document underwent peer-review by independent experts and members of the ESO Guideline Board and Executive Committee. The working group acknowledges the current evidentiary gap in delineating an unequivocal diagnostic algorithm for the detection of PFO. Although transoesophageal echocardiography is conventionally held as the most accurate diagnostic tool for PFO identification, its status as the 'gold standard' remains unsubstantiated by rigorously validated evidence. We found high-quality evidence to recommend PFO closure plus antiplatelet therapy in selected patients aged 18-60 years in whom no other evident cause of stroke is found but a PFO (i.e. PFO-associated stroke). The PASCAL classification system can be used to select such candidates for PFO closure. Patients with both a large right-to-left shunt and an atrial septal aneurysm benefit most from PFO closure. There is insufficient evidence to make an evidence-based recommendation on PFO closure in patients older than 60 and younger than 18 years. We found low quality evidence to suggest against PFO closure in patients with unlikely PFO-related stroke according to the PASCAL classification, except in specific scenarios (Expert Consensus). We suggest against long-term anticoagulation in patients with PFO-associated stroke unless anticoagulation is indicated for other medical reasons. Regarding the long-term AF monitoring after PFO closure, the working group concluded that there remains significant uncertainty regarding the risks and benefits associated with the use of long-term cardiac monitoring, such as implantable loop recorders. This document provides additional guidance, in the form of evidence-based recommendations or expert consensus statements, on diagnostic methods for PFO detection, and medical management after PFO closure., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Aims: It is unclear whether early cardiac rhythm control is beneficial in patients with acute ischemic stroke and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF). We sought to investigate whether PAF self-termination and in-hospital sinus rhythm (SR) restoration is associated with improved outcome in ischemic stroke patients with PAF, compared to those with sustained atrial fibrillation (AF)., Methods: Consecutive patients with first-ever acute stroke and confirmed PAF during hospitalization were followed for up to 10 years after the index stroke or until death. We investigated the association of in-hospital self-terminated PAF and PAF conversion to SR compared to sustained AF with 10-year all-cause mortality, stroke recurrence, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Cox regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of each outcome., Results: Among 297 ischemic stroke patients with in-hospital PAF detection, PAF was self-terminated in 87 (29.3%) patients, while 143 (48.1%) patients received antiarrhythmic medication in order to achieve PAF conversion to SR. During a median (Interquartile range, IQR) period of 28 (4-68) months, among patients with self-terminated PAF there were 13.5 deaths, 3.6 stroke recurrences, and 5.3 MACE per 100 patient-year while in patients who underwent medical PAF conversion there were 11.7 deaths, 4.6 stroke recurrences, and 5.8 MACE per 100 patient-year. Patients with sustained AF experienced 23.8 deaths, 8.7 stroke recurrences, and 13.9 MACE per 100 patient-years. In multivariable analysis, compared to patients with sustained AF, PAF self-termination was associated with significantly lower 10 years-risk of death (adjusted hazards ratio (adjHR): HR: 0.63, 95% Confidence interval: 0.40-0.96), stroke recurrence (adjHR: HR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.19-0.91), and MACE (adjHR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.23-0.81), while PAF medical conversion to SR was associated with lower 10 years-risk of death (adjHR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.44-0.97) and MACE (adjHR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.33-0.95)., Discussion: This study showed that in-hospital PAF self-termination was associated with lower risk of 10-year mortality, stroke recurrence, and MACE, potentially attributed to the lower burden of AF, whereas in-hospital PAF conversion to SR was associated with lower risk of 10-year mortality and MACE., Conclusion: Early restoration of sinus rhythm is associated with improved survival and MACE in patients with acute ischemic stroke and PAF., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Dr. D. Sagris reports no disclosures, Dr. E. Korompoki reports no disclosures, Dr. G. Ntaios reports speaker fees/advisory boards/research support from: Abbott; Amgen; Bayer; BMS/Pfizer; Boehringer-Ingelheim; Elpen; Galenica. All fees are paid directly to his institution (University of Thessaly), Dr. S. Tzeis reports no disclosures, Dr. E. Manios reports no disclosures, Dr. J. Kanakakis reports no disclosures, Dr. H. Milionis reports speaker fees/advisory boards/research support from: Alexion, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Elpen, Genesis Pharma, MSD, Pfizer, Sanofi, Servier, Viatris, Winmedica, Dr. P. Papanagiotou: reports no disclosures, Dr. G. Andrikopoulos reports speaker fees/advisory boards/research support from: AstraZeneca, Abbot, Bard, Bayer Healthcare, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, ELPEN, Galenica, Lilly, Medtronic, Menarini, MSD, Pfizer, Sanofi, Servier, StJude, Unifarma, and Vianex, Dr. GY Lip: consultant and speaker for BMS/Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Daiichi-Sankyo. No fees are received personally, Dr. K. Vemmos: reports speaker fees/advisory boards from: Amgen; Bayer; BMS/Pfizer; Boehringer-Ingelheim; Elpen., (© European Stroke Organisation 2022.)

The first European Stroke Organization (ESO) standard operating procedure (SOP) published in 2015 aimed at the implementation the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to provide evidence-based guidelines for stroke management. This second ESO-SOP is aiming at further increase of the practicability of ESO guidelines and its technical implications. Authors comprised of the members of the ESO guideline Board and ESO Executive Committee. The final document was agreed on by several internal reviews. The second SOP comprises of the following aspects: rational for the SOP, the introduction of expert consensus statements, types of guideline documents, structures involved and detailed description of the guideline preparation process, handling of financial and intellectual conflicts of interest (CoI), involvement of ESO members in the guideline process, review process, authorship and publication policy, updating of guidelines, cooperation with other societies, and dealing with falsified data. This second SOP supersedes the first SOP published in 2015., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interests: AHA is an employee of the Oslo University Hospital, Norway. AHA reports fee for lecturing from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Allergan, Teva, Novartis, Roche, and Teva and research grant from Medtronic and Boehringer Ingelheim outside submitted work. HC is an employee of Bispebjerg og Frederiksberg Hospital in Copenhagen Denmark. HC has nothing to disclose. MD is an employee of LMU Klinikum, Institut für Schlaganfall- und Demenzforschung (ISD) in Munich, Germany. MD has nothing to disclose. BF is an employee of Hospital Universitario La Paz in Madrid, Spain. BF has nothing to disclose. EK is an employee of the Imperial College London Charing Cross Hospital, UK. EK has received travel grants from Pfizer and Bayer and reports advisory board for Pfizer outside the submitted work. PK is an employee of University of Cincinnati, USA. PK has nothing to disclose. JMF is an employee of the Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau in Barcelona, Spain. JMF has nothing to disclose. BN is an employee of the Lund University Hospital in Sweden. BN reports personal fees from Astra Zeneca and Bayer outside the submitted work. TQ is an employee of the University of Glasgow, Scotland. TQ has nothing to disclose. SS is an employee of the University of L’Aquila, Italy. SS reports grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Allergan, Novartis, personal fees and non-financial support from Teva, Eli Lilly, personal fees from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from Abbott, Medscape, other from Pfizer, non-financial support from Bayer, Medtronic, Starmed, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo outside the submitted work. TS is an employee of the Klinikum Frankfurt Höchst, Germany and the Heidelberg University Hospital. TS reports personal fees Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, BMS Pfizer, Daiichy Sankyo, Portola outside the submitted work. DT is an employee of Sapienza University of Rome, Italy. DT report personal fees from Abbott, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic, Pfizer, outside the submitted work. GT is an employee of Sainte-Anne hospital, Université de Paris, France. GT reports personal fees from Guerbet France, outside the submitted work. MZ is an employee of Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale di Reggio Emilia, Italy. MZ has nothing to disclose., (© European Stroke Organisation 2021.)

Rationale: Cerebrovascular diseases associated with pregnancy and postpartum period are uncommon; however, they can have an important impact on health of both women and foetus or newborn., Aims: To evaluate the frequency, characteristics and management of cerebrovascular events in pregnant/postpartum women, to clarify pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the occurrence of these events including biomolecular aspects, and to assess the short- and long-term cerebrovascular and global cardiovascular outcome of these patients, their predictors and infant outcome., Methods and Design: This is an observational, prospective, multicentre, international case-control study. The study will include patients with cerebrovascular events during pregnancy and/or within six months after delivery. For each included case, two controls will be prospectively recruited: one pregnant or puerperal subject without any history of cerebrovascular event and one non-pregnant or non-puerperal subject with a recent cerebrovascular event. All controls will be matched by age, ethnicity and type of cerebrovascular event with their assigned cases. The pregnant controls will be matched also by pregnancy weeks/trimester. Follow-up will last 24 months for the mother and 12 months for the infant., Summary: To better understand causes and outcomes of uncommon conditions like pregnancy/postpartum-related cerebrovascular events, the development of multisite, multidisciplinary registry-based studies, such as the Stroke in Pregnancy and Postpartum study, is needed in order to collect an adequate number of patients, draw reliable conclusions and give definite recommendations on their management., (© European Stroke Organisation 2019.)

The purpose of the European Stroke Organisation-Karolinska Stroke Update Conference is to provide updates on recent stroke therapy research and to give an opportunity for the participants to discuss how these results may be implemented into clinical routine. The meeting started 22 years ago as Karolinska Stroke Update, but since 2014 it is a joint conference with European Stroke Organisation. Importantly, it provides a platform for discussion on the European Stroke Organisation guidelines process and on recommendations to the European Stroke Organisation guidelines committee on specific topics. By this, it adds a direct influence from stroke professionals otherwise not involved in committees and work groups on the guideline procedure. The discussions at the conference may also inspire new guidelines when motivated. The topics raised at the meeting are selected by the scientific programme committee mainly based on recent important scientific publications. This year's European Stroke Organisation-Karolinska Stroke Update Meeting was held in Stockholm on 11-13 November 2018. There were 11 scientific sessions discussed in the meeting including two short sessions. Each session except the short sessions produced a consensus statement ( Full version with background, issues, conclusions and references are published as web-material and at www.eso-karolinska.org and http://eso-stroke.org) and recommendations which were prepared by a writing committee consisting of session chair(s), scientific secretary and speakers. These statements were presented to the 250 participants of the meeting. In the open meeting, general participants commented on the consensus statement and recommendations and the final document were adjusted based on the discussion from the general participants Recommendations (grade of evidence) were graded according to the 1998 Karolinska Stroke Update meeting with regard to the strength of evidence. Grade A Evidence: Strong support from randomised controlled trials and statistical reviews (at least one randomised controlled trial plus one statistical review). Grade B Evidence: Support from randomised controlled trials and statistical reviews (one randomised controlled trial or one statistical review). Grade C Evidence: No reasonable support from randomised controlled trials, recommendations based on small randomised and/or non-randomised controlled trials evidence., (© European Stroke Organisation 2019.)

Patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack and non-valvular atrial fibrillation have a high risk of recurrent stroke and other vascular events. The aim of this guideline is to provide recommendations on antithrombotic medication for secondary prevention of stroke and other vascular outcomes in these patients. The working group identified questions and outcomes, graded evidence, and developed recommendations according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach and the European Stroke Organisation (ESO) standard operating procedure for guidelines. The guideline was reviewed and approved by the ESO guideline board and the ESO executive committee. In patients with atrial fibrillation and previous stroke or transient ischemic attack, oral anticoagulants reduce the risk of recurrence over antiplatelets or no antithrombotic treatment. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants are preferred over vitamin K antagonists because they have a lower risk of major bleeding and death. Recommendations are weak regarding timing of treatment, (re-)starting oral anticoagulants in patients with previous intracerebral haemorrhage, and treatment in specific patient subgroups of those of older age, with cognitive impairment, renal failure or small vessel disease, because of a lack of strong evidence. In conclusion, for patients with atrial fibrillation and ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants are the preferred treatment for secondary prevention of recurrent stroke or thromboembolism. Further research is required to determine the best timing for initiating oral anticoagulants after an acute ischemic stroke, whether or not oral anticoagulants should be (re)started in patients with a history of intracerebral haemorrhage, and the best secondary preventive treatment in specific subgroups., (© European Stroke Organisation 2019.)