Henk Marquering

Dr. Henk Marquering

Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Department of Biomedical Engineering & Physics, Amsterdam UMC, location AMC, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

32Years (1995-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 January 2015 in New England Journal of Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
OBOlvert A. Berkhemer
Olvert A. Berkhemer
PFPuck S.S. Fransen
Puck S.S. Fransen
DBDebbie Beumer
Debbie Beumer
LBLucie A. van Den Berg
Lucie A. van Den Berg
HLHester F. Lingsma
Hester F. Lingsma
DDDiederik W.J. Dippel
Diederik W.J. Dippel
In patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by a proximal intracranial arterial occlusion, intraarterial treatment is highly effective for emergency revascularization. However, proof of a beneficial effect on functional outcome is lacking. We randomly assigned eligible patients to either intraarterial treatment plus usual care or usual care alone. Eligible patients had a proximal arterial occlusion in the anterior cerebral circulation that was confirmed on vessel imaging and that could be treated intraarterially within 6 hours after symptom onset. The primary outcome was the modified Rankin scale score at 90 days; this categorical scale measures functional outcome, with scores ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 6 (death). The treatment effect was estimated with ordinal logistic regression as a common odds ratio, adjusted for prespecified prognostic factors. The adjusted common odds ratio measured the likelihood that intraarterial treatment would lead to lower modified Rankin scores, as compared with usual care alone (shift analysis). We enrolled 500 patients at 16 medical centers in the Netherlands (233 assigned to intraarterial treatment and 267 to usual care alone). The mean age was 65 years (range, 23 to 96), and 445 patients (89.0%) were treated with intravenous alteplase before randomization. Retrievable stents were used in 190 of the 233 patients (81.5%) assigned to intraarterial treatment. The adjusted common odds ratio was 1.67 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21 to 2.30). There was an absolute difference of 13.5 percentage points (95% CI, 5.9 to 21.2) in the rate of functional independence (modified Rankin score, 0 to 2) in favor of the intervention (32.6% vs. 19.1%). There were no significant differences in mortality or the occurrence of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage. In patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by a proximal intracranial occlusion of the anterior circulation, intraarterial treatment administered within 6 hours after stroke onset was effective and safe. (Funded by the Dutch Heart Foundation and others; MR CLEAN Netherlands Trial Registry number, NTR1804, and Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN10888758.)

1 October 2015 in Stroke
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RKRüdiger von Kummer
Rüdiger von Kummer
JBJoseph P. Broderick
Joseph P. Broderick
BCBruce C.V. Campbell
Bruce C.V. Campbell
ADAndrew Demchuk
Andrew Demchuk
MGMayank Goyal
Mayank Goyal
WHWerner Hacke
Werner Hacke

1 June 2016 in The Lancet
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MBM Irem Baharoglu
M Irem Baharoglu
CCCharlotte Cordonnier
Charlotte Cordonnier
RSRustam Al-Shahi Salman
Rustam Al-Shahi Salman
KGKoen De Gans
Koen De Gans
MKMaria M Koopman
Maria M Koopman
PIPATCH Investigators
PATCH Investigators
Platelet transfusion after acute spontaneous primary intracerebral haemorrhage in people taking antiplatelet therapy might reduce death or dependence by reducing the extent of the haemorrhage. We aimed to investigate whether platelet transfusion with standard care, compared with standard care alone, reduced death or dependence after intracerebral haemorrhage associated with antiplatelet therapy use. We did this multicentre, open-label, masked-endpoint, randomised trial at 60 hospitals in the Netherlands, UK, and France. We enrolled adults within 6 h of supratentorial intracerebral haemorrhage symptom onset if they had used antiplatelet therapy for at least 7 days beforehand and had a Glasgow Coma Scale score of at least 8. With use of a secure web-based system that concealed allocation and used biased coin randomisation, study collaborators randomly assigned participants (1:1; stratified by hospital and type of antiplatelet therapy) to receive either standard care or standard care with platelet transfusion within 90 min of diagnostic brain imaging. Participants and local investigators giving interventions were not masked to treatment allocation, but allocation was concealed from outcome assessors and investigators analysing data. The primary outcome was shift towards death or dependence rated on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 3 months, and analysed by ordinal logistic regression, adjusted for stratification variables and the Intracerebral Haemorrhage Score. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat and as-treated populations. This trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, number NTR1303, and is now closed. Between Feb 4, 2009, and Oct 8, 2015, 41 sites enrolled 190 participants. 97 participants were randomly assigned to platelet transfusion and 93 to standard care. The odds of death or dependence at 3 months were higher in the platelet transfusion group than in the standard care group (adjusted common odds ratio 2·05, 95% CI 1·18-3·56; p=0·0114). 40 (42%) participants who received platelet transfusion had a serious adverse event during their hospital stay, as did 28 (29%) who received standard care. 23 (24%) participants assigned to platelet transfusion and 16 (17%) assigned to standard care died during hospital stay. Platelet transfusion seems inferior to standard care for people taking antiplatelet therapy before intracerebral haemorrhage. Platelet transfusion cannot be recommended for this indication in clinical practice. The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Sanquin Blood Supply, Chest Heart and Stroke Scotland, French Ministry of Health.

1 January 2019 in The Lancet Neurology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DDDominique Deplanque
Dominique Deplanque
CMCharles B L M Majoie
Charles B L M Majoie
BMBijoy K Menon
Bijoy K Menon
YNYassi Nawaf
Yassi Nawaf
GSGagan Sharma
Gagan Sharma
JCJames Cunningham
James Cunningham

1 October 2018 in The Lancet Neurology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ARAránzazu Román-San-Miguel
Aránzazu Román-San-Miguel
BMBijoy K Menon
Bijoy K Menon
JBJordi Blasco
Jordi Blasco
MHMaría Hernández-Pérez
María Hernández-Pérez
ADAntoni Dávalos
Antoni Dávalos
JCJames Cunningham
James Cunningham

2 September 2013 in European Heart Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MGMaarten Groenink
Maarten Groenink
AHAlexander W. Den Hartog
Alexander W. Den Hartog
RFRomy Franken
Romy Franken
TRTeodora Radonic
Teodora Radonic
VWVivian de Waard
Vivian de Waard
BMBarbara J.M. Mulder
Barbara J.M. Mulder
Patients with Marfan syndrome have an increased risk of life-threatening aortic complications, mostly preceded by aortic dilatation. Treatment with losartan, an angiotensin-II receptor-1 blocker, may reduce aortic dilatation rate in Marfan patients. In this multicentre, open-label, randomized controlled trial with blinded assessments, we compared losartan treatment with no additional treatment in operated and unoperated adults with Marfan syndrome. The primary endpoint was aortic dilatation rate at any predefined aortic level after 3 years of follow-up, as determined by magnetic resonance imaging. A total of 233 participants (47% female) underwent randomization to either losartan (n = 116) or no additional treatment (n = 117). Aortic root dilatation rate after 3.1 ± 0.4 years of follow-up was significantly lower in the losartan group than in controls (0.77 ± 1.36 vs. 1.35 ± 1.55 mm, P = 0.014). Aortic dilatation rate in the trajectory beyond the aortic root was not significantly reduced by losartan. In patients with prior aortic root replacement, aortic arch dilatation rate was significantly lower in the losartan group when compared with the control group (0.50 ± 1.26 vs. 1.01 ± 1.31 mm, P = 0.033). No significant differences in separate clinical endpoints or the composite endpoint (aortic dissection, elective aortic surgery, cardiovascular death) between the groups could be demonstrated. In adult Marfan patients, losartan treatment reduces aortic root dilatation rate. After aortic root replacement, losartan treatment reduces dilatation rate of the aortic arch.