Vertebral artery stenosis in the Basilar Artery International Cooperation Study (BASICS): prevalence and outcome

We assessed the prevalence of vertebral artery (VA) stenosis or occlusion and its influence on outcome in patients with acute basilar artery occlusion (BAO). We studied 141 patients with acute BAO enrolled in the Basilar Artery International Cooperation Study (BASICS) registry of whom baseline CT angiography (CTA) of the intracranial VAs was available. In 72 patients an additional CTA of the extracranial VAs was available. Adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) for death and poor outcome, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score ≥4, were calculated with Poisson regression in relation to VA occlusion, VA occlusion or stenosis ≥50 %, and bilateral VA occlusion. Sixty-six of 141 (47 %) patients had uni- or bilateral intracranial VA occlusion or stenosis ≥50 %. Of the 72 patients with intra- and extracranial CTA, 46 (64 %) had uni- or bilateral VA occlusion or stenosis ≥50 % and 9 (12 %) had bilateral VA occlusion. Overall, VA occlusion or stenosis ≥50 % was not associated with the risk of poor outcome. Patients with intra- and extracranial CTA and bilateral VA occlusion had a higher risk of poor outcome than patients without bilateral VA occlusion (aRR, 1.23; 95 % CI 1.02-1.50). The risk of death did not depend on the presence of unilateral or bilateral VA occlusion or stenosis ≥50 %. In conclusion, in patients with acute BAO, unilateral VA occlusion or stenosis ≥50 % is frequent, but not associated with an increased risk of poor outcome or death. Patients with BAO and bilateral VA occlusion have a slightly increased risk of poor outcome.

Anticoagulant vs. antiplatelet therapy in patients with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

AIMS The preferred antithrombotic strategy for secondary prevention in patients with cryptogenic stroke (CS) and patent foramen ovale (PFO) is unknown. We pooled multiple observational studies and used propensity score-based methods to estimate the comparative effectiveness of oral anticoagulation (OAC) compared with antiplatelet therapy (APT). METHODS AND RESULTS Individual participant data from 12 databases of medically treated patients with CS and PFO were analysed with Cox regression models, to estimate database-specific hazard ratios (HRs) comparing OAC with APT, for both the primary composite outcome [recurrent stroke, transient ischaemic attack (TIA), or death] and stroke alone. Propensity scores were applied via inverse probability of treatment weighting to control for confounding. We synthesized database-specific HRs using random-effects meta-analysis models. This analysis included 2385 (OAC = 804 and APT = 1581) patients with 227 composite endpoints (stroke/TIA/death). The difference between OAC and APT was not statistically significant for the primary composite outcome [adjusted HR = 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-1.12] or for the secondary outcome of stroke alone (adjusted HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.44-1.27). Results were consistent in analyses applying alternative weighting schemes, with the exception that OAC had a statistically significant beneficial effect on the composite outcome in analyses standardized to the patient population who actually received APT (adjusted HR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.42-0.99). Subgroup analyses did not detect statistically significant heterogeneity of treatment effects across clinically important patient groups. CONCLUSION We did not find a statistically significant difference comparing OAC with APT; our results justify randomized trials comparing different antithrombotic approaches in these patients.