Dalius Jatuzis

Efficacy and Safety of Oral Lacosamide as Adjunctive Therapy in Adults with Partial‐Onset Seizures

Summary:  Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lacosamide when added to 1 or 2 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in adults with uncontrolled partial‐onset seizures, and assess plasma concentrations of concomitant AEDs to determine any potential for drug interactions.

The decay of memory between delayed and long-term recall in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy

OBJECTIVES Impairment of long-term recall may worsen everyday functioning of patients with epilepsy even if the standard short-term or delayed recall tests do not show significant abnormalities. We evaluated prospectively the decay of memory between delayed and long-term recall in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) and controls with the aim of identifying the determinants of long-term memory impairment. METHODS Seventy patients with TLE and 59 controls underwent neuropsychological assessment of verbal and nonverbal memory, attention, and executive functions at visit 1. Long-term verbal and nonverbal memory was tested with the same word list, verbal logical story, and Rey-Osterrieth complex figure test 4 weeks later at visit 2. The decay in memory was estimated as information recalled at visit 2 as a percentage of the delayed recall at visit 1. RESULTS Frequent seizures (> or = 4 per month) during the study period were related to poor long-term recall, even for those patients who did relatively well on delayed recall tests. On all long-term memory tests, patients with complex partial and/or secondary generalized seizures did significantly worse than patients with simple partial seizures. The presence of interictal generalized or focal temporal epileptiform activity was associated with more accelerated forgetting of the word list and complex figure. Multiple regression analysis confirmed that number of complex partial seizures, age of patient, and abnormal interictal EEG are significant predictors of accelerated forgetting. CONCLUSIONS Uncontrolled seizures, especially with ictal impairment of consciousness, can be a significant factor in the accelerated decay of memory, although subclinical interictal epileptiform EEG activity may also be relevant.

Factors Influencing In-Hospital Delay in Treatment With Intravenous Thrombolysis

Background and Purpose— Shortening door-to-needle time (DNT) for the thrombolytic treatment of stroke can improve treatment efficacy by reducing onset-to-treatment time. The goal of our study was to explore the association between DNT and outcome and to identify factors influencing DNT to better understand why some patients are treated late. Methods— Prospectively collected data from the Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke-East registry (SITS-EAST: 9 central and eastern European countries) on all patients treated with thrombolysis between February 2003 and February 2010 were analyzed. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of DNT ⩽60 minutes. Results— Altogether, 5563 patients were treated with thrombolysis within 4.5 hours of symptom onset. Of these, 2097 (38%) had DNT ⩽60 minutes. In different centers, the proportion of patients treated with DNT ⩽60 minutes ranged from 18% to 84% (P<0.0001). Patients with longer DNT (in 60-minute increments) had less chance of achieving a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 1 at 3 months (adjusted OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77–0.97). DNT ⩽60 minutes was independently predicted by younger age (in 10-year increments; OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.87–0.97), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 7 to 24 (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.2–1.7), onset-to-door time (in 10-minute increments; OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.17–1.22), treatment center (P<0.001), and country (P<0.001). Conclusions— Thrombolysis of patients with older age and mild or severe neurological deficit is delayed. The perception that there is sufficient time before the end of the thrombolytic window also delays treatment. It is necessary to improve adherence to guidelines and to treat patients sooner after arrival to hospital.

Role of Preexisting Disability in Patients Treated With Intravenous Thrombolysis for Ischemic Stroke

Background and Purpose— Little is known about the effect of thrombolysis in patients with preexisting disability. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of different levels of prestroke disability on patients’ profile and outcome after intravenous thrombolysis. Methods— We analyzed the data of all stroke patients admitted between October 2003 and December 2011 that were contributed to the Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke–Eastern Europe (SITS-EAST) registry. Patients with no prestroke disability at all (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score, 0) were used as a reference in multivariable logistic regression. Results— Of 7250 patients, 5995 (82%) had prestroke mRS 0, 791 (11%) had prestroke mRS 1, 293 (4%) had prestroke mRS 2, and 171 (2%) had prestroke mRS ≥3. Compared with patients with mRS 0, all other groups were older, had more comorbidities, and more severe neurological deficit on admission. There was no clear association between preexisting disability and the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Prestroke mRS 1, 2, and ≥3 were associated with increased risk of death at 3 months (odds ratio, 1.3, 2.0, and 2.6, respectively) and lower chance of achieving favorable outcome (achieving mRS 0–2 or returning to the prestroke mRS; 0.80, 0.41, 0.59, respectively). Patients with mRS ≥3 and 2 had similar vascular profile and favorable outcome (34% versus 29%), despite higher mortality (48% versus 39%). Conclusions— Prestroke disability does not seem to independently increase the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage after thrombolysis. Despite higher mortality, 1 in 3 previously disabled patients may return to his/her prestroke mRS. Therefore, they should not be routinely excluded from thrombolytic therapy.

External Validation of the SEDAN Score for Prediction of Intracerebral Hemorrhage in Stroke Thrombolysis

Background and Purpose— The SEDAN score is a prediction rule for assessment of the risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH) per the European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study (ECASS) II definition in patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with intravenous thrombolysis. We assessed the performance of the score in predicting SICH per the ECASS II and Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke Monitoring Study (SITS-MOST) definitions in the SITS–International Stroke Thrombolysis Register (SITS-ISTR). Methods— We calculated the SEDAN score in 34 251 patients with complete data, enrolled into the SITS-ISTR. The risk for SICH by both definitions was calculated per score category. Odds ratios for SICH per point increase of the score were obtained using logistic regression. The predictive performance was assessed using area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC). Results— The predictive capability for SICH per ECASS II was moderate at AUC-ROC=0.66. With rising scores, there was a moderate increase in risk for SICH per ECASS II (odds ratio, 1.65 per point; 95% confidence interval, 1.59–1.72; P<0.001), with SICH rates between 1.6% for 0 points and 16.9% for ≥5 points, average 5.1%. The predictive capability for SICH per SITS–MOST was weaker, AUC-ROC=0.60, with lower increase per score point (odds ratio, 1.36 per point; 95% confidence interval, 1.28–1.46; P<0.001), and SICH rates between 0.8% for 0 points and 5.4% for ≥5 points, average 1.8%. Conclusions— In this very large data set, the predictive and discriminatory performances of the SEDAN score were only moderate for SICH per ECASS II and low for SICH per SITS–Monitoring Study.

Angiotensin receptor blockade in acute stroke. The Scandinavian Candesartan Acute Stroke Trial: rationale, methods and design of a multicentre, randomised- and placebo-controlled clinical trial (NCT00120003)

Background Elevated blood pressure following acute stroke is common, and yet early antihypertensive treatment is controversial. ACCESS suggested a beneficial effect of the angiotensin receptor blocker candesartan in the acute phase of stroke, but these findings need to be confirmed in new, large trials. Aims and design The Scandinavian Candesartan Acute Stroke Trial is an international randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of candesartan in acute stroke. We plan to recruit 2500 patients presenting within 30 h of stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic) and with systolic blood pressure ≥ 140 mmHg. The recruited patients are randomly assigned to candesartan or placebo for 7-days (doses increasing from 4 to 16mg once daily). Randomisation is performed centrally via a secure web interface. The follow-up period is 6-months. Patients are included from the following nine North-European countries: Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Germany, Poland, Lithuania, Estonia and Finland. Study outcomes There are two co-primary effect variables: Funding The Scandinavian Candesartan Acute Stroke Trial receives basic funding from Norwegian health authorities. AstraZeneca supplies the trial drugs, and AstraZeneca and Takeda support the trial with limited, unrestricted grants. Summary The Scandinavian Candesartan Acute Stroke Trial is the first large trial of angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with elevated blood pressure and acute stroke, and aims to answer whether treatment with angiotensin receptor blockers is beneficial for this indication.

Increasing value and reducing waste in stroke research

Stroke is a major burden to patients and society, and resources spent on stroke research must be used efficiently and produce good value in terms of improvements in human health. However, many instances of poor value from stroke research funding have resulted from the way in which stroke research topics have been chosen and how studies have been designed, conducted, analysed, regulated, managed, disseminated, or reported. A cooperative effort of European stroke researchers aimed to identify sources of inefficiency and waste, recommend approaches to increase value, and highlight examples of best practice in stroke research. Evidence suggests that progress has been made, but there is room for much improvement; researchers, funders, regulators, and other stakeholders in stroke research might consider these recommendations when planning new research.

Safety of Statin Pretreatment in Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke

Background and Purpose— A recent meta-analysis investigating the association between statins and early outcomes in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) indicated that prestroke statin treatment was associated with increased risk of 90-day mortality and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. We investigated the potential association of statin pretreatment with early outcomes in a large, international registry of AIS patients treated with IVT. Methods— We analyzed prospectively collected data from the Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke-East registry (SITS-EAST) registry on consecutive AIS patients treated with IVT during an 8-year period. Early clinical recovery within 24 hours was defined as reduction in baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of ≥10 points. Favorable functional outcome at 3 months was defined as modified Rankin Scale scores of 0 to 1. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was diagnosed using National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, European-Australasian Acute Stroke Study-II and SITS definitions. Results— A total of 1660 AIS patients treated with IVT fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Patients with statin pretreatment (23%) had higher baseline stroke severity compared with cases who had not received any statin at symptom onset. After adjusting for potential confounders, statin pretreatment was not associated with a higher likelihood of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage defined by any of the 3 definitions. Statin pretreatment was not related to 3-month all-cause mortality (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.57–1.49; P=0.741) or 3-month favorable functional outcome (odds ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.52–1.27; P=0.364). Statin pretreatment was independently associated with a higher odds of early clinical recovery (odds ratio, 1.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.25–2.92; P=0.003). Conclusions— Statin pretreatment seems not to be associated with adverse outcomes in AIS patients treated with IVT. The effect of statin pretreatment on early functional outcomes in thrombolysed AIS patients deserves further investigation.

Benefit of thrombolysis for stroke is maintained around the clock: Results from the SITS-EAST Registry

The outcome of thrombolysis for early morning and sleep time strokes may be worse because of uncertainty of stroke onset time or differences in logistics. The aim of the study was to analyze if stroke outcome after intravenous thrombolysis differs depending on time of day when the stroke occurs.

Intravenous Thrombolysis for Stroke Recurring Within 3 Months From the Previous Event

Background and Purpose— According to the European license, alteplase can be given no sooner than 3 months after previous stroke. However, it is not known whether past history of stroke influences the effect of treatment. Our aim was to evaluate safety and functional outcome after intravenous thrombolysis administered in everyday practice to patients with previous stroke ⩽3 months compared with those with first-ever stroke. Methods— We analyzed consecutive cases treated with alteplase between October 2003 and July 2014 contributed to the Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis for Stroke–Eastern Europe registry from 12 countries. Odds ratios were calculated using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression. Results— Of 13 007 patients, 11 221 (86%) had no history of stroke and 249 (2%) experienced previous stroke ⩽3 months before admission. Patients with previous stroke ⩽3 months had a higher proportion of hypertension and hyperlipidemia. There were no significant differences in outcome, including symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage according to European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study (unadjusted odds ratio 1.27, 95% confidence interval: 0.74–2.15), and being alive and independent at 3 months (odds ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval: 0.61–1.09). Conclusions— Patients currently treated with alteplase, despite a history of previous stroke ⩽3 months, do not seem to achieve worse outcome than those with first-ever stroke. Although careful patient selection was probably of major importance, our findings provide reassurance that this group of patients may safely benefit from thrombolysis and should not be arbitrarily excluded as a whole. Further studies are needed to identify the shortest safe time lapse from the previous event to treatment with alteplase.