Jason P. Appleton

Hypercholesterolaemia and vascular dementia

Vascular dementia (VaD) is the second commonest cause of dementia. Stroke is the leading cause of disability in adults in developed countries, the second major cause of dementia and the third commonest cause of death. Traditional vascular risk factors-diabetes, hypercholesterolaemia, hypertension and smoking-are implicated as risk factors for VaD. The associations between cholesterol and small vessel disease (SVD), stroke, cognitive impairment and subsequent dementia are complex and as yet not fully understood. Similarly, the effects of lipids and lipid-lowering therapy on preventing or treating dementia remain unclear; the few trials that have assessed lipid-lowering therapy for preventing (two trials) or treating (four trials) dementia found no evidence to support the use of lipid-lowering therapy for these indications. It is appropriate to treat those patients with vascular risk factors that meet criteria for lipid-lowering therapy for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, and in line with current guidelines. Managing the individual patient in a holistic manner according to his or her own vascular risk profile is recommended. Although the paucity of randomized controlled evidence makes for challenging clinical decision making, it provides multiple opportunities for on-going and future research, as discussed here.

Tranexamic acid for hyperacute primary IntraCerebral Haemorrhage (TICH-2): an international randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 superiority trial

Summary Background Tranexamic acid can prevent death due to bleeding after trauma and post-partum haemorrhage. We aimed to assess whether tranexamic acid reduces haematoma expansion and improves outcome in adults with stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage. Methods We did an international, randomised placebo-controlled trial in adults with intracerebral haemorrhage from acute stroke units at 124 hospital sites in 12 countries. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 1 g intravenous tranexamic acid bolus followed by an 8 h infusion of 1 g tranexamic acid or a matching placebo, within 8 h of symptom onset. Randomisation was done centrally in real time via a secure website, with stratification by country and minimisation on key prognostic factors. Treatment allocation was concealed from patients, outcome assessors, and all other health-care workers involved in the trial. The primary outcome was functional status at day 90, measured by shift in the modified Rankin Scale, using ordinal logistic regression with adjustment for stratification and minimisation criteria. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN93732214. Findings We recruited 2325 participants between March 1, 2013, and Sept 30, 2017. 1161 patients received tranexamic acid and 1164 received placebo; the treatment groups were well balanced at baseline. The primary outcome was assessed for 2307 (99%) participants. The primary outcome, functional status at day 90, did not differ significantly between the groups (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·88, 95% CI 0·76–1·03, p=0·11). Although there were fewer deaths by day 7 in the tranexamic acid group (101 [9%] deaths in the tranexamic acid group vs 123 [11%] deaths in the placebo group; aOR 0·73, 0·53–0·99, p=0·0406), there was no difference in case fatality at 90 days (250 [22%] vs 249 [21%]; adjusted hazard ratio 0·92, 95% CI 0·77–1·10, p=0·37). Fewer patients had serious adverse events after tranexamic acid than after placebo by days 2 (379 [33%] patients vs 417 [36%] patients), 7 (456 [39%] vs 497 [43%]), and 90 (521 [45%] vs 556 [48%]). Interpretation Functional status 90 days after intracerebral haemorrhage did not differ significantly between patients who received tranexamic acid and those who received placebo, despite a reduction in early deaths and serious adverse events. Larger randomised trials are needed to confirm or refute a clinically significant treatment effect. Funding National Institute of Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme and Swiss Heart Foundation.

Ambulance-delivered transdermal glyceryl trinitrate versus sham for ultra-acute stroke: Rationale, design and protocol for the Rapid Intervention with Glyceryl trinitrate in Hypertensive stroke Trial-2 (RIGHT-2) trial (ISRCTN26986053):

Rationale Vascular nitric oxide levels are low in acute stroke and donors such as glyceryl trinitrate have shown promise when administered very early after stroke. Potential mechanisms of action include augmentation of cerebral reperfusion, thrombolysis and thrombectomy, lowering blood pressure, and cytoprotection. Aim To test the safety and efficacy of four days of transdermal glyceryl trinitrate (5 mg/day) versus sham in patients with ultra-acute presumed stroke who are recruited by paramedics prior to hospital presentation. Sample size estimates The sample size of 850 patients will allow a shift in the modified Rankin Scale with odds ratio 0.70 (glyceryl trinitrate versus sham, ordinal logistic regression) to be detected with 90% power at 5% significance (two-sided). Design The Rapid Intervention with Glyceryl trinitrate in Hypertensive stroke Trial-2 (RIGHT-2) is a multicentre UK prospective randomized sham-controlled outcome-blinded parallel-group trial in 850 patients with ultra-acute (≤4 h of onset) FAST-positive presumed stroke and systolic blood pressure ≥120 mmHg who present to the ambulance service following a 999 emergency call. Data collection is performed via a secure internet site with real-time data validation. Study outcomes The primary outcome is the modified Rankin Scale measured centrally by telephone at 90 days and masked to treatment. Secondary outcomes include: blood pressure, impairment, recurrence, dysphagia, neuroimaging markers of the acute lesion including vessel patency, discharge disposition, length of stay, death, cognition, quality of life, and mood. Neuroimaging and serious adverse events are adjudicated blinded to treatment. Discussion RIGHT-2 has recruited more than 500 participants from seven UK ambulance services. Status Trial is ongoing. Funding British Heart Foundation. Registration ISRCTN26986053.

The Insulin Resistance Intervention after Stroke trial: A perspective on future practice and research

The prevention of recurrent events after ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack is well established and based on lifestyle changes, antithrombotics, statins, antihypertensives and carotid surgery. The international IRIS trial assessed whether pioglitazone, a glucose-lowering insulin-sensitizing drug, would reduce recurrent vascular events in patients with ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack. After 4.8 years, pioglitazone therapy was associated with reduced vascular events and new diabetes, and an increase in weight, oedema and bone fractures. Pioglitazone may add to the strategies for preventing further events in patients with stroke or transient ischaemic attack.

Blood pressure management in acute stroke

Blood pressure (BP) is elevated in 75% or more of patients with acute stroke and is associated with poor outcomes. Whether to modulate BP in acute stroke has long been debated. With the loss of normal cerebral autoregulation, theoretical concerns are twofold: high BP can lead to cerebral oedema, haematoma expansion or haemorrhagic transformation; and low BP can lead to increased cerebral infarction or perihaematomal ischaemia. Published evidence from multiple large, high-quality, randomised trials is increasing our understanding of this challenging area, such that BP lowering is recommended in acute intracerebral haemorrhage and is safe in ischaemic stroke. Here we review the evidence for BP modulation in acute stroke, discuss the issues raised and look to on-going and future research to identify patient subgroups who are most likely to benefit.

Management of acute intracerebral haemorrhage – an update

Managing acute intracerebral haemorrhage is a challenging task for physicians. Evidence shows that outcome can be improved with admission to an acute stroke unit and active care, including urgent reversal of anticoagulant effects and, potentially, intensive blood pressure reduction. Nevertheless, many management issues remain controversial, including the use of haemostatic therapy, selection of patients for neurosurgery and neurocritical care, the extent of investigations for underlying causes and the benefit versus risk of restarting antithrombotic therapy after an episode of intracerebral haemorrhage.

Blood pressure in acute stroke: to treat or not to treat - that is still the question

One of the oldest questions in acute stroke management, and perhaps the most challenging since it has yet to be solved after more than half a century of published research, is how to manage high blood pressure (BP). The problem might be summed up as follows: > To treat , or not to treat : that is the question: > > Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer > > The slings and arrows of outrageous pressure , > > Or to take drugs against a sea of blood , > > And by opposing end them? To live : to walk ; > > —With apologies to Shakespeare , Hamlet Act III, Scene I To treat, or not to treat, high BP was debated >30 years ago in 1985,1–3 and yet there is no definitive answer here in 2018. Part of the debate is driven by opposing arguments based on epidemiology and pathophysiology and part by the failure of every large trial to provide a definitive answer. There is considerable evidence that high BP is associated independently with a poor outcome after ischemic stroke (IS) whether defined by early recurrence or death, or late death and dependency.4,5 Similarly, high BP is related to hematoma expansion6 and functional outcome after intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH).7 A straightforward conclusion of this epidemiological evidence is that high BP should be lowered. In contrast, pathophysiological concerns are based on the presence of dysfunctional cerebral autoregulation during acute stroke, and so lowering BP will reduce tissue perfusion, increase lesion size, and thereby worsen outcome.8 There are many causes of high BP in acute stroke, including prior hypertension, acute neuroendocrine stimulation (via the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system [RAAS], sympathetic autonomic nervous, and corticotrophin-cortisol systems), the Cushing reflex (due to raised intracranial pressure), and stress associated with admission to hospital and …

Baseline characteristics of the 3096 patients recruited into the ‘Triple Antiplatelets for Reducing Dependency after Ischemic Stroke’ trial

Background The risk of recurrence following ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack is highest immediately after the event. Antiplatelet agents are effective in reducing the risk of recurrence and two agents are superior to one in the early phase after ictus. Design The triple antiplatelets for reducing dependency after ischemic stroke trial was an international multicenter prospective randomized open-label blinded-endpoint trial that assessed the safety and efficacy of short-term intensive antiplatelet therapy with three agents (combined aspirin, clopidogrel and dipyridamole) as compared with guideline treatment in acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack. The primary outcome was stroke recurrence and its severity, measured using the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included recurrent vascular events, functional measures (cognition, disability, mood, quality of life), and safety (bleeding, death, serious adverse events). Data are number (%) or mean (standard deviation, SD). Results Recruitment ran from April 2009 to March 2016; 3096 patients were recruited from 106 sites in four countries (Denmark 1.6%, Georgia 2.7%, New Zealand 0.2%, UK 95.4%). Randomization characteristics included: age 69.0 (10.1) years; male 1945 (62.8%); time onset to randomization 29.4 (11.9) h; stroke severity (National Institutes for Health Stroke Scale) 2.8 (3.6); blood pressure 143.5 (18.2)/79.5 (11.4) mmHg; IS 2143 (69.2%), transient ischemic attack 953 (30.8%). Conclusion Triple antiplatelets for reducing dependency after ischemic stroke was a large trial of intensive/triple antiplatelet therapy in acute ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack, and included participants from four predominantly Caucasian countries who were representative of patients in many western stroke services.

Assessment of consent models as an ethical consideration in the conduct of prehospital ambulance randomised controlled clinical trials: a systematic review

BackgroundWe sought to understand the main ethical considerations when conducting clinical trials in the prehospital ambulance based setting.MethodsA systematic review of the literature on randomised controlled trials in ambulance settings was undertaken. A search of eight databases identified published studies involving recruitment of ambulance service users. Four independent authors undertook abstract and full-text reviews to determine eligibility and extract relevant data. The data extraction concentrated on ethical considerations, with any discussion of ethics being included for further analysis. The resultant data were combined to form a narrative synthesis.ResultsIn all, 56 papers were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. Issues relating to consent were the most significant theme identified. Type of consent differed depending on the condition or intervention being studied. The country in which the research took place did not appear to influence the type of consent, apart from the USA where exception from consent appeared to be most commonly used. A wide range of terms were used to describe consent.ConclusionsConsent was the main ethical consideration in published ambulance based research. A range of consent models were used ranging from informed consent to exception from consent (waiver of consent). Many studies cited international guidelines as informing their choice of consent model but diverse and sometimes confused terms were used to describe these models. This suggests that standardisation of consent models and the terminology used to describe them is warranted.

Triple versus guideline antiplatelet therapy to prevent recurrence after acute ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack: the TARDIS RCT

BACKGROUND Two antiplatelet agents are better than one for preventing recurrent stroke after acute ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). Therefore, intensive treatment with three agents might be better still, providing it does not cause undue bleeding. OBJECTIVE To compare the safety and efficacy of intensive therapy with guideline antiplatelet therapy for acute ischaemic stroke and TIA. DESIGN International prospective randomised open-label blinded end-point parallel-group superiority clinical trial. SETTING Acute hospitals at 106 sites in four countries. PARTICIPANTS Patients > 50 years of age with acute non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke or TIA within 48 hours of ictus (stroke). INTERVENTIONS Participants were allocated at random by computer to 1 month of intensive (combined aspirin, clopidogrel and dipyridamole) or guideline (combined aspirin and dipyridamole, or clopidogrel alone) antiplatelet agents, and followed for 90 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was the incidence and severity of any recurrent stroke (ischaemic, haemorrhagic; assessed using the modified Rankin Scale) or TIA within 90 days by blinded telephone follow-up. Analysis using ordinal logistic regression was by intention to treat. Other outcomes included bleeding and its severity, death, myocardial infarction (MI), disability, mood, cognition and quality of life. RESULTS The trial was stopped early on the recommendation of the Data Monitoring Committee after recruitment of 3096 participants (intensive, n = 1556; guideline, n = 1540) from 106 hospitals in four countries between April 2009 and March 2016. The incidence and severity of recurrent stroke or TIA did not differ between intensive and guideline therapy in 3070 (99.2%) participants with data [93 vs. 105 stroke/TIA events; adjusted common odds ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 1.20; p = 0.47]. Major (encompassing fatal) bleeding was increased with intensive as compared with guideline therapy [39 vs. 17 participants; adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 2.23, 95% CI 1.25 to 3.96; p = 0.006]. There were no differences between the treatment groups in all-cause mortality, or the composite of death, stroke, MI and major bleeding (aHR 1.02, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.35; p = 0.88). LIMITATIONS Patients and investigators were not blinded to treatment. The comparator group comprised two guideline strategies because of changes in national guidelines during the trial. The trial was stopped early, thereby reducing its statistical power. CONCLUSIONS The use of three antiplatelet agents is associated with increased bleeding without any significant reduction in recurrence of stroke or TIA. FUTURE WORK The safety and efficacy of dual antiplatelet therapy (combined aspirin and clopidogrel) versus aspirin remains to be defined. Further research is required on identifying individual patient response to antiplatelets, and the relationship between response and the subsequent risks of vascular recurrent events and bleeding complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN47823388. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 48. See the NIHR Journal Library website for further project information. The Triple Antiplatelets for Reducing Dependency after Ischaemic Stroke (TARDIS) vanguard phase was funded by the British Heart Foundation (grant PG/08/083/25779, from 1 April 2009 to 30 September 2012) and indirect funding was provided by the Stroke Association through its funding of the Stroke Trials Unit, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. There was no commercial support for the trial and antiplatelet drugs were sourced locally at each site. The trial was sponsored by the University of Nottingham.