Search

Objective The mandible is the most common fractured craniofacial bone of all craniofacial fractures in the Philippines, with the mandibular body as the most involved segment of all mandibular fractures. To the best of our knowledge, there are no existing guidelines for the diagnosis and management of mandibular body fractures in particular. General guidelines include the American Academy of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAOHNSF) Resident Manual of Trauma to the Face, Head, and Neck chapter on Mandibular Trauma, the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (AAOMS) Clinical Practice Guidelines for Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery section on the Mandibular Angle, Body, and Ramus, and a 2013 Cochrane Systematic Review on interventions for the management of mandibular fractures. On the other hand, a very specific Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Unilateral Condylar Fracture of the Mandible was published by the Ministry of Health Malaysia in 2005. Addressing the prevalence of mandibular body fractures, and dearth of specific guidelines for its diagnosis and management, this clinical practice guideline focuses on the management of isolated mandibular body fractures in adults. Purpose This guideline is meant for all clinicians (otolaryngologists – head and neck surgeons, as well as primary care and specialist physicians, nurses and nurse practitioners, midwives and community health workers, dentists, and emergency first-responders) who may provide care to adults aged 18 years and above that may present with an acute history and physical and/ or laboratory examination findings that may lead to a diagnosis of isolated mandibular body fracture and its subsequent medical and surgical management, including health promotion and disease prevention. It is applicable in any setting (including urban and rural primary-care, community centers, treatment units, hospital emergency rooms, operating rooms) in which adults with isolated mandibular body fractures would be identified, diagnosed, or managed. Outcomes are functional resolution of isolated mandibular body fractures; achieving premorbid form; avoiding use of context-inappropriate diagnostics and therapeutics; minimizing use of ineffective interventions; avoiding co-morbid infections, conditions, complications and adverse events; minimizing cost; maximizing health-related quality of life of individuals with isolated mandibular body fracture; increasing patient satisfaction; and preventing recurrence in patients and occurrence in others.

Background and purposeA subset of ischaemic stroke patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) have ischaemic stroke despite anticoagulation. We sought to determine the association between prestroke anticoagulant therapy and recurrent ischaemic events and symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH).MethodsWe included consecutive patients with acute ischaemic stroke and AF from the Initiation of Anticoagulation after Cardioembolic stroke (IAC) study from eight comprehensive stroke centres in the USA. We compared recurrent ischaemic events and delayed sICH risk using adjusted Cox regression analyses between patients who were prescribed anticoagulation (ACp) versus patients who were naïve to anticoagulation therapy prior to the ischaemic stroke (anticoagulation naïve).ResultsAmong 2084 patients in IAC, 1518 had prior anticoagulation status recorded and were followed for 90 days. In adjusted Cox hazard models, ACp was associated with some evidence of a higher risk higher risk of 90-day recurrent ischaemic events only in the fully adjusted model (adjusted HR 1.50, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.28, p=0.058) but not increased risk of 90-day sICH (adjusted HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.51, p=0.862). In addition, switching anticoagulation class was not associated with reduced risk of recurrent ischaemic events (adjusted HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.33, p=0.136) nor sICH (adjusted HR 1.47, 95% CI 0.29 to 7.50, p=0.641).ConclusionAF patients with ischaemic stroke despite anticoagulation may have higher recurrent ischaemic event risk compared with anticoagulation-naïve patients. This suggests differing underlying pathomechanisms requiring different stroke prevention measures and identifying these mechanisms may improve secondary prevention strategies.

IntroductionPredictors of long-term ischaemic and haemorrhagic complications in atrial fibrillation (AF) have been studied, but there are limited data on predictors of early ischaemic and haemorrhagic complications after AF-associated ischaemic stroke. We sought to determine these predictors.MethodsThe Initiation of Anticoagulation after Cardioembolic stroke study is a multicentre retrospective study across that pooled data from consecutive patients with ischaemic stroke in the setting of AF from stroke registries across eight comprehensive stroke centres in the USA. The coprimary outcomes were recurrent ischaemic event (stroke/TIA/systemic arterial embolism) and delayed symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (d-sICH) within 90 days. We performed univariate analyses and Cox regression analyses including important predictors on univariate analyses to determine independent predictors of early ischaemic events (stroke/TIA/systemic embolism) and d-sICH.ResultsOut of 2084 patients, 1520 patients qualified; 104 patients (6.8%) had recurrent ischaemic events and 23 patients (1.5%) had d-sICH within 90 days from the index event. In Cox regression models, factors associated with a trend for recurrent ischaemic events were prior stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (HR 1.42, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.10) and ipsilateral arterial stenosis with 50%–99% narrowing (HR 1.54, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.43). Those associated with sICH were male sex (HR 2.68, 95% CI 1.06 to 6.83), history of hyperlipidaemia (HR 2.91, 95% CI 1.08 to 7.84) and early haemorrhagic transformation (HR 5.35, 95% CI 2.22 to 12.92).ConclusionIn patients with ischaemic stroke and AF, predictors of d-sICH are different than those of recurrent ischaemic events; therefore, recognising these predictors may help inform early stroke versus d-sICH prevention strategies.

Background Intravenous alteplase improves outcome after acute ischemic stroke without a benefit in 90‐day mortality. There are limited data on whether alteplase is associated with reduced mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF)‐related ischemic stroke whose mortality rate is relatively high. We sought to determine the association of alteplase with hemorrhagic transformation and mortality in patients with AF. Methods and Results We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke between 2015 and 2018 diagnosed with AF included in the IAC (Initiation of Anticoagulation After Cardioembolic Stroke) study, which pooled data from stroke registries at 8 comprehensive stroke centers across the United States. For our primary analysis, we included patients who did not undergo mechanical thrombectomy (MT), and secondary analyses included patients who underwent MT. We used binary logistic regression to determine whether alteplase use was associated with risk of hemorrhagic transformation and 90‐day mortality. There were 1889 patients (90.6%) who had 90‐day follow‐up data available for analyses and were included; 1367 patients (72.4%) did not receive MT, and 522 patients (27.6%) received MT. In our primary analyses we found that alteplase use was independently associated with an increased risk for hemorrhagic transformation (odds ratio [OR], 2.23; 95% CI, 1.57–3.17) but reduced risk of 90‐day mortality (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39–0.87). Among patients undergoing MT, alteplase use was not associated with a significant reduction in 90‐day mortality (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45–1.04). Conclusions Alteplase reduced 90‐day mortality of patients with acute ischemic stroke with AF not undergoing MT. Further study is required to assess the efficacy of alteplase in patients with AF undergoing MT.

Background and Purpose: In patients with acute ischemic stroke and atrial fibrillation, treatment with low molecular weight heparin increases early hemorrhagic risk without reducing early recurrence, and there is limited data comparing warfarin to direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) therapy. We aim to compare the effects of the treatments above on the risk of 90-day recurrent ischemic events and delayed symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Methods: We included consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke and atrial fibrillation from the IAC (Initiation of Anticoagulation after Cardioembolic) stroke study pooling data from stroke registries of 8 comprehensive stroke centers across the United States. We compared recurrent ischemic events and delayed symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage between each of the following groups in separate Cox-regression analyses: (1) DOAC versus warfarin and (2) bridging with heparin/low molecular weight heparin versus no bridging, adjusting for pertinent confounders to test these associations. Results: We identified 1289 patients who met the bridging versus no bridging analysis inclusion criteria and 1251 patients who met the DOAC versus warfarin analysis inclusion criteria. In adjusted Cox-regression models, bridging (versus no bridging) treatment was associated with a high risk of delayed symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (hazard ratio, 2.74 [95% CI, 1.01–7.42]) but a similar rate of recurrent ischemic events (hazard ratio, 1.23 [95% CI, 0.63–2.40]). Furthermore, DOAC (versus warfarin) treatment was associated with a lower risk of recurrent ischemic events (hazard ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.29–0.87]) but not delayed symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (hazard ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.22–1.48]). Conclusions: Our study suggests that patients with ischemic stroke and atrial fibrillation would benefit from the initiation of a DOAC without bridging therapy. Due to our study limitations, these findings should be interpreted with caution pending confirmation from large prospective studies.

Background/Aims: Guidelines suggest initiating anticoagulation after cardioembolic stroke within 4-14 days from the index event. Data supporting this suggestion did not account for important factors such as infarct burden or early hemorrhagic transformation. Methods: We pooled data from stroke registries of 8 comprehensive stroke centers across the United States. We included consecutive patients admitted with an acute cardioembolic stroke in the setting of atrial fibrillation. The primary predictor was timing of initiating anticoagulation (0-3 days, 4-14 days, or >14 days) and the primary outcome was the composite endpoint of recurrent stroke/TIA/systemic embolism, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), or major extracranial hemorrhage (ECH) within 90 days. Results: We enrolled 2090 patients from 8 comprehensive centers in the United States, 1325 met the inclusion criteria (362 were excluded due to non-composite endpoint related death within 90 days, 145 lost to follow up, and 258 were not started on oral anticoagulation or the timing was not reported). Anticoagulation (875 DOAC, 404 Warfarin) was initiated in 0-3 days in 49.7%, 4-14 days in 40.4%, and >14 days in 9.9%. The combined endpoint occurred in 10.7% (142) (98 ischemic events, 21 sICH, and 30 ECH) and did not differ between the three groups: 0-3 days (11.9%), 4-14 days (9.9%), >14 days (9.9%), p=0.525. After adjusting for confounders (such as infarct volume, bridging, CHADS2-Vasc, cardiac thrombus, and hemorrhage on 24-hr imaging), oral anticoagulation timing in the 4-14 day period (vs. >14) was not associated with a reduction in ischemic events (adjusted OR 0.74, p=0.438) and oral anticoagulation timing 4-14 days (vs. 0-3) was not associated with a reduction in sICH (OR 1.28, p=0.638). Factors associated with sICH were bridging (OR 5.36, p=0.001) and hemorrhage on 24-hr imaging (OR 7.26, p Conclusion: In this multicenter real world cohort, the recommended (4-14 days) timeframe to start oral anticoagulation was not associated with reduced ischemic and hemorrhagic outcomes. Randomized trials are required determine the optimal timing of anticoagulation initiation.

Objective Guidelines recommend initiating anticoagulation within 4 to 14 days after cardioembolic stroke. Data supporting this did not account for key factors potentially affecting the decision to initiate anticoagulation, such as infarct size, hemorrhagic transformation, or high-risk features on echocardiography. Methods We pooled data from stroke registries of 8 comprehensive stroke centers across the United States. We included consecutive patients admitted with ischemic stroke and atrial fibrillation. The primary predictor was timing of initiating anticoagulation (0-3 days, 4-14 days, or >14 days), and outcomes were recurrent stroke/transient ischemic attack/systemic embolism, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), and major extracranial hemorrhage (ECH) within 90 days. Results Among 2,084 patients, 1,289 met the inclusion criteria. The combined endpoint occurred in 10.1% (n = 130) subjects (87 ischemic events, 20 sICH, and 29 ECH). Overall, there was no significant difference in the composite endpoint between the 3 groups (0-3 days: 10.3%, 64/617; 4-14 days: 9.7%, 52/535; >14 days: 10.2%, 14/137; p = 0.933). In adjusted models, patients started on anticoagulation between 4 and 14 days did not have a lower rate of sICH (vs 0-3 days; odds ratio [OR] = 1.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.50-4.43), nor did they have a lower rate of recurrent ischemic events (vs >14 days; OR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.36-1.62, p = 0.482). Interpretation In this multicenter real-world cohort, the recommended (4-14 days) time frame to start oral anticoagulation was not associated with reduced ischemic and hemorrhagic outcomes. Randomized trials are required to determine the optimal timing of anticoagulation initiation. ANN NEUROL 2020;88:807-816.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Understanding factors associated with ischemic stroke despite therapeutic anticoagulation is an important goal to improve stroke prevention strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We aim to determine factors associated with therapeutic or supratherapeutic anticoagulation status at the time of ischemic stroke in patients with AF. METHODS: The Initiation of Anticoagulation after Cardioembolic stroke (IAC) study is a multicenter study pooling data from stroke registries of eight comprehensive stroke centers across the United States. Consecutive patients hospitalized with acute ischemic stroke in the setting of AF were included in the IAC cohort. For this study, we only included patients who reported taking warfarin at the time of the ischemic stroke. Patients not on anticoagulation and patients who reported use of a direct oral anticoagulant were excluded. Analyses were stratified based on therapeutic (INR ≥2) versus subtherapeutic (INR