Search

It is not known whether the current territorial organization for acute revascularization treatments in ischemic stroke patients guarantees similar time to treatment and functional outcomes among different levels of institutional stroke care. We aimed to assess the impact of time to treatment on functional outcomes in ischemic stroke patients who received intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) alone, bridging (IVT plus thrombectomy), or primary thrombectomy in level 1 and level 2 Stroke Units (SUs) in Triveneto, a geographical macroarea in Northeast of Italy. We conducted an analysis of data prospectively collected from 512 consecutive ischemic stroke patients who received IVT and/or mechanical thrombectomy in 25 SUs from September 17th to December 9th 2018. The favorable outcome measures were mRS score 0–1 and 0–2 at 3months. The unfavorable outcome measures were mRS score 3–5 and death at 3months. We estimated separately the possible association of each variable for time to treatment (onset-to-door, door-to-needle, onset-to-needle, door-to-groin puncture, needle-to-groin puncture, and onset-to-groin puncture) with 3-month outcome measures by calculating the odds ratios (ORs) with two-sided 95% confidence intervals (CI) after adjustment for pre-defined variables and variables with a probability value ≤ 0.10 in the univariate analysis for each outcome measure. Distribution of acute revascularization treatments was different between level 1 and level 2 SUs (p < 0.001). Among 182 patients admitted to level 1 SUs (n = 16), treatments were IVT alone in 164 (90.1%), bridging in 12 (6.6%), and primary thrombectomy in 6 (3.3%) patients. Among 330 patients admitted to level 2 SUs (n = 9), treatments were IVT alone in 219 (66.4%), bridging in 74 (22.4%), and primary thrombectomy in 37 (11.2%) patients. Rates of excellent outcome (51.4% vs 45.9%), favorable outcome (60.1% vs 58.7%), unfavorable outcome (33.3% vs 33.8%), and death (9.8% vs 11.3%) at 3months were similar between level 1 and 2 SUs. No significant association was found between time to IVT alone (onset-to-door, door-to-needle, and onset-to-needle) and functional outcomes. After adjustment, door-to-needle time ≤ 60min (OR 4.005, 95% CI 1.232–13.016), shorter door-to-groin time (OR 0.991, 95% CI 0.983–0.999), shorter needle-to-groin time (OR 0.986, 95% CI 0.975–0.997), and shorter onset-to-groin time (OR 0.994, 95% CI 0.988–1.000) were associated with mRS 0–1. Shorter door-to-groin time (OR 0.991, 95% CI 0.984–0.998), door-to-groin time ≤ 90min (OR 12.146, 95% CI 2.193–67.280), shorter needle-to-groin time (OR 0.983, 95% CI 0.972–0.995), and shorter onset-to-groin time (OR 0.993, 95% CI 0.987–0.999) were associated with mRS 0–2. Longer door-to-groin time (OR 1.007, 95% CI 1.001–1.014) and longer needle-to-groin time (OR 1.019, 95% CI 1.005–1.034) were associated with mRS 3–5, while door-to-groin time ≤ 90min (OR 0.229, 95% CI 0.065–0.808) was inversely associated with mRS 3–5. Longer onset-to-needle time (OR 1.025, 95% CI 1.002–1.048) was associated with death. Times to treatment influenced the 3-month outcomes in patients treated with thrombectomy (bridging or primary). A revision of the current territorial organization for acute stroke treatments in Triveneto is needed to reduce transfer time and to increase the proportion of patients transferred from a level 1 SU to a level 2 SU to perform thrombectomy.

The effects of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) on cognitive function have yet to be fully elucidated. The aim of our study was to administer a battery of cognitive tests to identify any cognitive changes occurring in a consecutive series of patients who underwent CEA using the eversion technique under local anesthesia.This prospective study was designed to analyze a consecutive series of patients undergoing eversion CEA under local anesthesia for significant carotid stenosis at our vascular surgery unit over a period of 6 months. Patients underwent tests to rule-out those who already had cognitive impairments or states of depression/anxiety capable of interfering with cognitive testing outcomes. Patients then completed a battery of 10 neurocognitive tests preoperatively and again 30 days and 4 months after surgery to assess the functions of both cerebral hemispheres as thoroughly as possible.Of the 48 patients initially considered for our study, 39 completed the follow-up. They were 71.4 ± 8.2 (mean ± SD) years of age; 30 were men and 9 were women. Six were symptomatic for carotid stenosis and 33 were asymptomatic. All patients were examined by a neurologist and underwent pre- and postoperative nuclear MRI or CT scan of the brain to identify any cerebral ischemia potentially correlated with the surgical procedure. In all cases, the cognitive test findings tended to improve postoperatively; this improvement was statistically significant in 7 tests. Post-hoc analysis confirmed an improvement between the pre- and postoperative test results. Among the different variables considered, only age75 years seems to have influenced cognitive improvement.The effects on cognitive function of carotid stenosis, particularly CEA, is still a much debated issue. The data reported in the literature vary considerably, preventing any final conclusions from being drawn. The mechanisms capable of inducing changes in cognitive status after CEA have yet to be precisely clarified. In our study, a suitable battery of tests were used to analyze the trend of cognitive function correlating with eversion CEA under local anesthesia. Our results demonstrate substantially improved cognitive function after CEA, which was statistically significant in 7 of 10 tests. We surmise that the CEA procedure, per se, can help to protect patients against cognitive deterioration, especially in those75 years of age.