Background and Purpose: Acute ischemic stroke may occur in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but risk factors, in-hospital events, and outcomes are not well studied in large cohorts. We identified risk factors, comorbidities, and outcomes in patients with COVID-19 with or without acute ischemic stroke and compared with patients without COVID-19 and acute ischemic stroke. Methods: We analyzed the data from 54 health care facilities using the Cerner deidentified COVID-19 dataset. The dataset included patients with an emergency department or inpatient encounter with discharge diagnoses codes that could be associated to suspicion of or exposure to COVID-19 or confirmed COVID-19. Results: A total of 103 (1.3%) patients developed acute ischemic stroke among 8163 patients with COVID-19. Among all patients with COVID-19, the proportion of patients with hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, atrial fibrillation, and congestive heart failure was significantly higher among those with acute ischemic stroke. Acute ischemic stroke was associated with discharge to destination other than home or death (relative risk, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.6–2.4]; P <0.0001) after adjusting for potential confounders. A total of 199 (1.0%) patients developed acute ischemic stroke among 19 513 patients without COVID-19. Among all ischemic stroke patients, COVID-19 was associated with discharge to destination other than home or death (relative risk, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.0–1.3]; P =0.03) after adjusting for potential confounders. Conclusions: Acute ischemic stroke was infrequent in patients with COVID-19 and usually occurs in the presence of other cardiovascular risk factors. The risk of discharge to destination other than home or death increased 2-fold with occurrence of acute ischemic stroke in patients with COVID-19.

Background and Purpose —Percutaneous angioplasty of the intracranial arteries still carries the risk of dissection, with acute closure and embolization. Stenting has been shown to improve the safety and durability of angioplasty in every circulatory bed in which it has been applied. However, stenting of the intracranial arteries has been limited by the availability of stents that can be reliably deployed intracranially. Methods —Twelve patients underwent elective stenting of the basilar artery after episodes of vertebrobasilar ischemia. In all patients, either medical therapy had failed or the patient had a contraindication for long-term anticoagulation. Information from independent neurological examinations, quantitative angiography, and clinical follow-up was collected. Differences between pretreatment and posttreatment degree of stenoses were subjected to 1-way ANOVA for repeated measures. Results —There were 10 men and 2 women, all white, aged 40 to 82 years (mean age, 62.6 years). Stent placement was successful in all patients, leading to statistically significant changes in the degree of stenosis, from 71.4% (range, 53% to 90%) to 10.3% (range, 0% to 36%) ( P <0.0001). There were no deaths, stent thromboses, perforations, ruptures, or myocardial infarctions. Clinical follow-up was available for 0.5 to 16 months (mean, 5.9 months). One patient had nonspecific symptoms, and another had a transient ischemic attack. All other patients remained asymptomatic. Conclusions —Elective stenting of the basilar artery is feasible, with minimal risk to the patient. Its impact on long-term stroke prevention and its durability are unknown and will require further study.

Object: The use of intracranial stents in stent-assisted coil embolization is now a current neurosurgical practice worldwide. The clinical utility of these stents in the sole stenting (SS) technique, however, has not been thoroughly described, and the published reports of this experience are scarce. This study was designed to evaluate SS treatment of dissecting and nondissecting aneurysms of the posterior circulation. Methods: This prospective and descriptive study was conducted in 20 consecutive patients who harbored single aneurysms of the posterior circulation and who were treated using the SS approach in the last 3 years. The clinical and radiological assessment and follow-up of the patients were evaluated using the modified Rankin scale as well as with computed tomography angiography and digital subtraction angiography at discharge and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: Eleven of the 20 patients had subarachnoid hemorrhages, 3 presented with ischemia, 1 presented with brainstem compression, and the remaining 5 patients had incidentally discovered, asymptomatic lesions. Only 1 patient had a complication (occipital infarction) attributable to the SS procedure. One patient died of rebleeding 2 weeks after the procedure. At 1 month, 40% of the patients had a subtotal or total occlusion, which increased to 55% at 3 months and 85% at 6 months, with a final subtotal or total occlusion rate of 80% at 1 year. The SS procedure in 1 case was considered a failure at 6 months because no change had been noted since the 1-month follow-up. One case showed partial occlusion and 1 case showed recanalization. Conclusions: Use of SS for aneurysms in the posterior circulation complex is a safe and effective technique, demonstrating an occlusion rate of 80% at the 1-year follow up.

Significant delays often occur during the treatment of patients with acute stroke. Some of those delays occur in the hospital. We attempted to shorten inhospital treatment intervals by creating a rapid-response system, similar to that available for cardiac arrest, that would allow the stroke team to be available within a few minutes to care for stroke victims. We connected all beepers (pocket pagers) of stroke team members to a common access number and instructed the emergency staff to activate that number immediately upon arrival of a stroke victim. We monitored the response time and treatment interval for patients who were treated after this system was activated (Code Stroke patients) during the first 3 months of its availability and compared the results to those of patients seen for similar reasons during the study period but without the use of Code Stroke (control patients). A total of 12 Code Stroke patients were available for analysis, representing 12% of all patients (n = 98) seen in the emergency department for ischemic stroke during the study period. The remaining 86 patients constituted the control group. The mean time to evaluation of a Code Stroke patient by a stroke team member was 4.8 minutes (range, 2 to 7 minutes), and the mean time to treatment institution was 30 minutes (range, 10 to 120 minutes). There were significant differences between the consultation intervals in the two groups (P < .05). There was only a trend of a difference between treatment institution intervals (P = .06). It is possible to shorten inhospital treatment delays by instituting rapid-response systems within individual institutions.