Outcomes with Endovascular Treatment of Patients with M2 Segment MCA Occlusion in the Late Time Window

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Randomized trials in the late window have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of endovascular thrombectomy in large-vessel occlusions. Patients with M2-segment MCA occlusions were excluded from these trials. We compared outcomes with endovascular thrombectomy in patients with M2-versus-M1 occlusions presenting 6-24 hours after symptom onset.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Analyses were on pooled data from studies enrolling patients with stroke treated with endovascular thrombectomy 6-24 hours after symptom onset. We compared 90-day functional independence (mRS ≤ 2), mortality, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and successful reperfusion (expanded TICI = 2b-3) between patients with M2 and M1 occlusions. The benefit of successful reperfusion was then assessed among patients with M2 occlusion.

RESULTS

Of 461 patients, 367 (79.6%) had M1 occlusions and 94 (20.4%) had M2 occlusions. Patients with M2 occlusions were older and had lower median baseline NIHSS scores. Patients with M2 occlusion were more likely to achieve 90-day functional independence than those with M1 occlusion (adjusted OR = 2.13; 95% CI, 1.25-3.65). There were no significant differences in the proportion of successful reperfusion (82.9% versus 81.1%) or mortality (11.2% versus 17.2%). Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage risk was lower in patients with M2-versus-M1 occlusions (4.3% versus 12.2%, P = .03). Successful reperfusion was independently associated with functional independence among patients with M2 occlusions (adjusted OR = 2.84; 95% CI, 1.11-7.29).

CONCLUSIONS

In the late time window, patients with M2 occlusions treated with endovascular thrombectomy achieved better clinical outcomes, similar reperfusion, and lower symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage rates compared with patients with M1 occlusion. These results support the safety and benefit of endovascular thrombectomy in patients with M2 occlusions in the late window.

Longitudinal Doppler Assessments in Late Preterm Fetal Growth Restriction

PURPOSE

 To assess the longitudinal variation of the ratio of umbilical and cerebral artery pulsatility index (UCR) in late preterm fetal growth restriction (FGR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 A prospective European multicenter observational study included women with a singleton pregnancy, 32^+ 0-36^+ 6, at risk of FGR (estimated fetal weight [EFW] or abdominal circumference [AC] < 10^th percentile, abnormal arterial Doppler or fall in AC from 20-week scan of > 40 percentile points). The primary outcome was a composite of abnormal condition at birth or major neonatal morbidity. UCR was categorized as normal (< 0.9) or abnormal (≥ 0.9). UCR was assessed by gestational age at measurement interval to delivery, and by individual linear regression coefficient in women with two or more measurements.

RESULTS

 856 women had 2770 measurements; 696 (81 %) had more than one measurement (median 3 (IQR 2-4). At inclusion, 63 (7 %) a UCR ≥ 0.9. These delivered earlier and had a lower birth weight and higher incidence of adverse outcome (30 % vs. 9 %, relative risk 3.2; 95 %CI 2.1-5.0) than women with a normal UCR at inclusion. Repeated measurements after an abnormal UCR at inclusion were abnormal again in 67 % (95 %CI 55-80), but after a normal UCR the chance of finding an abnormal UCR was 6 % (95 %CI 5-7 %). The risk of composite adverse outcome was similar using the first or subsequent UCR values.

CONCLUSION

 An abnormal UCR is likely to be abnormal again at a later measurement, while after a normal UCR the chance of an abnormal UCR is 5-7 % when repeated weekly. Repeated measurements do not predict outcome better than the first measurement, most likely due to the most compromised fetuses being delivered after an abnormal UCR.

119 ENHANCING THE QUALITY OF STROKE CARE IN IRELAND - DEVELOPMENT OF AN IRISH NATIONAL STROKE AUDIT

Background

Population ageing, stroke treatment advances, changing models of care, and between-hospital heterogeneity in stroke outcomes demonstrate the necessity of continual audit of stroke care to support quality improvement at local and national levels, and to enhance patient recovery and wellbeing. This project aims to identify the core minimum datasets for acute and non-acute stroke care, and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), for integration in to the newly-developed Irish National Audit of Stroke (INAS), in addition to identifying resourcing needs and implementation procedures.

Methods

In Phase 1, a minimum dataset for acute stroke care was identified based on a scoping review of international practice and available guidelines. Phase 2 (ongoing) involves identifying datasets for non-acute rehabilitative and follow-up care based on a scoping review of international practice, iterative cycles of qualitative stakeholder engagement, and systematic review of PROMs. In Phase 3, a review of resourcing and data collection procedures used in stroke audits internationally will be used to produce an implementation strategy for data collection, contextualised to the Irish healthcare system.

Results

Twenty-one eligible international stroke registries were identified from the scoping review. Within Phase 1, core clinical and thrombectomy items in the Irish registry were benchmarked against internationally-collected items to identify common items and to generate an inventory of items that other registries collect that Ireland does not. Based on consensus agreement on the most frequently-occurring international items, as reviewed by key stakeholders, a core minimum dataset for audit of acute stroke care was delivered.

Conclusion

These minimum datasets shall act as the “gold standard” for evaluating stroke care in Ireland, by not only incorporating structure, process, and care quality outcome indicators, but also PROMs. The resultant datasets may inform policy and quality improvement initiatives, and shape health service delivery across the trajectory of stroke care, from hyper-acute care, to rehabilitation, and return to the community.

Multimorbidity, low income and unmet need for healthcare: a national study of 41,135 older adults

The aims of this study were: (1) to identify the determinants of unmet need for access to primary care in middle-aged and older adults; and (2) to examine the reasons for unmet need. We used data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA), a nationally representative survey of adults aged 45 to 85 years. Respondents were asked if they ‘needed health care during the last 12 months but did not receive it’. For those who replied ‘Yes’, the survey asked for the reason(s) for not receiving the needed care. Out of 41,135 respondents, 3,468 had unmet need for healthcare in the last 12 months. Among respondents with 0, 1, 2 and ≥3 morbidities, the proportion reporting unmet need was 2.5%, 5.3%, 5.1% and 9.1% respectively. After adjusting for covariates, the odds ratios (ORs) for unmet need for 1, 2 and ≥3 morbidities (compared to no morbidity) were 1.25 (95% CI: 0.87 to 1.78; p = 0.23), 1.57 (95% CI: 1.13 to 2.17; p < 0.05) and 2.03 (95% CI: 1.51 to 2.73; p < 0.05), respectively. For income groups, the ORs for unmet need (compared to >$150,000/year) were 0.94 (95% CI: 0.79 to 1.12) for $100,000-$150,000, 1.02 (95% CI: 0.87 to 1.20;) for $50,000-$100,000, 1.30 (95% CI: 1.09 to 1.55) for $20,000-$50,000, and 1.39 (95% CI: 1.08 to 1.78) for < $20,000. Other statistically significant determinants of unmet need included age (older adults were less likely to have unmet need), sex (females were more likely), having a family physician (less likely) and perceived physical and mental health (poor health more likely to be associated with unmet need). The most common reasons for unmet need were: ‘long wait time’ (52.1%) and ‘doctor did not think it was necessary’ (16.7%). Multimorbidity and low-income are associated with higher odds of unmet need among older adults. This disparity is partly due to not having a regular family physician and long wait time to see a doctor. Reducing these barriers are critical to reducing inequalities in health outcomes.