Reliable data on stroke incidence and prevalence are essential for calculating the burden of stroke and the planning of prevention and treatment of stroke patients. In the current study we have reviewed the published data from EU countries, Iceland, Norway, and Switzerland, and provide WHO estimates for stroke incidence and prevalence in these countries. Studies on stroke epidemiology published in peer‐reviewed journals during the past 10 years were identified using Medline/PubMed searches, and reviewed using the structure of WHO's stroke component of the WHO InfoBase. WHO estimates for stroke incidence and prevalence for each country were calculated from routine mortality statistics. Rates from studies that met the ‘ideal’ criteria were compared with WHO's estimates. Forty‐four incidence studies and 12 prevalence studies were identified. There were several methodological differences that hampered comparisons of data. WHO stroke estimates were in good agreement with results from ‘ideal’ stroke population studies. According to the WHO estimates the number of stroke events in these selected countries is likely to increase from 1.1 million per year in 2000 to more than 1.5 million per year in 2025 solely because of the demographic changes. Until better and more stroke studies are available, the WHO stroke estimates may provide the best data for understanding the stroke burden in countries where no stroke data currently exists. A standardized protocol for stroke surveillance is recommended.

Background: Although diabetes mellitus (DM) is a risk factor for stroke, it is unclear whether stroke features are different in diabetic vs nondiabetic individuals. Objective: To assess the role of DM in stroke patients. Methods: Risk factors, etiology, lesion topography, clinical features, and outcome were assessed in 611 diabetic individuals (history of DM or fasting plasma glucose level of ≥7.0 mmol/L) among 4,064 consecutive patients of the Lausanne Stroke Registry. Results: Patients with DM were 5.3 years older than non-DM patients. After multivariate analysis, DM was associated with lower relative prevalence of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH; odds ratio [95% CI]: 0.63 (0.45 to 0.9); p = 0.022), higher relative prevalence of subcortical infarction (SCI; 1.34 [1.11 to 1.62]; p = 0.009), and higher relative frequency of small-vessel (SVD; 1.78 [1.31 to 3.82]; p = 0.012) and large-artery (LAD; 2.02 [1.31 to 2.02]; p = 0.002) disease. In the cohort of diabetic stroke patients, there was no interaction of DM with either hypertension or age for the outcomes of ICH, SCI, SVD, and LAD. Moderate to severe deficit on admission (31.1 vs 31.6%; p = 0.4) and poor functional outcome at 1 month (14.1 vs 15.3%; p = 0.24) did not differ in patients with DM compared with non-DM patients. In multivariate analysis, neither DM (0.86 [0.63 to 1.11]; p = 0.15) nor hypertension (1.09 [0.91 to 1.39]; p = 0.32) was associated with poor functional outcome. Conclusions: Diabetic stroke patients are associated with specific patterns of stroke type, etiology, and topography but not with poor functional outcome. There was no interaction between DM and hypertension or age.

Background and Purpose— Hyperperfusion syndrome (HS) after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been related to impaired cerebrovascular autoregulation in a chronically hypoperfused hemisphere. Our aim was to provide new insight into the pathophysiology of the HS using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI). Methods— Five out of 388 consecutive patients presented 2 to 7 days after CEA, partial seizures (n=5), focal deficits (n=5), and intracerebral hemorrhage (n=3). In 4 patients, using sequential examinations, we identified vasogenic or cytotoxic edema by DWI; we assessed relative interhemispheric difference (RID) of cerebral blood flow (CBF) by PWI; and we measured middle cerebral artery mean flow velocities (MCA Vm) by transcranial Doppler (TCD). Results— None of the patients presented pathological DWI hyperintensities, consistent with the absence of acute ischemia or cytotoxic edema. In 2 patients, we found an MRI pattern of reversible vasogenic edema similar to that observed in the posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome. Middle cerebral artery (MCA) mean flow velocities (Vm) were not abnormally increased at any time. PWI documented a 20% to 44% RID of CBF in favor of the ipsilateral to CEA hemisphere. Conclusions— HS can occur in the presence of moderate relative hyperperfusion of the ipsilateral hemisphere. MCA Vm values may not accurately reflect RID of CBF over the cortical convexity. We suggest that the hemodynamic pathogenetic mechanisms of the HS are more complicated than hitherto believed and that they may be more accurately described by the term “reperfusion syndrome.”

Background and Purpose—: We conducted a randomized exploratory study to assess safety and the probability of a favorable outcome with adjunctive argatroban, a direct thrombin-inhibitor, administered to recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (r-tPA)–treated ischemic stroke patients. Methods—: Patients treated with standard-dose r-tPA, not receiving endovascular therapy, were randomized to receive no argatroban or argatroban (100 μg/kg bolus) followed by infusion of either 1 (low dose) or 3 μg/kg per minute (high dose) for 48 hours. Safety was incidence of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage. Probability of clinical benefit (modified Rankin Scale score 0–1 at 90 days) was estimated using a conservative Bayesian Poisson model (neutral prior probability centered at relative risk, 1.0 and 95% prior intervals, 0.33–3.0). Results—: Ninety patients were randomized: 29 to r-tPA alone, 30 to r-tPA+low-dose argatroban, and 31 to r-tPA+high-dose argatroban. Rates of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage were similar among control, low-dose, and high-dose arms: 3/29 (10%), 4/30 (13%), and 2/31 (7%), respectively. At 90 days, 6 (21%) r-tPA alone, 9 (30%) low-dose, and 10 (32%) high-dose patients were with modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1. The relative risks (95% credible interval) for modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1 with low, high, and either low or high dose argatroban were 1.17 (0.57–2.37), 1.27 (0.63–2.53), and 1.34 (0.68–2.76), respectively. The probability that adjunctive argatroban was superior to r-tPA alone was 67%, 74%, and 79% for low, high, and low or high dose, respectively. Conclusions—: In patients treated with r-tPA, adjunctive argatroban was not associated with increased risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage and provides evidence that a definitive effectiveness trial is indicated. Clinical Trial Registration—: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique Identifier: NCT01464788.

Symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis is associated with a high risk of recurrent stroke, with higher risks for intracranial than for extracranial stenosis. Vertebral artery stenosis can be treated with stenting with good technical results, but whether it results in improved clinical outcome is uncertain. We aimed to compare vertebral stenting with medical treatment for symptomatic vertebral stenosis. We did a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysis of three completed randomised controlled trials comparing stenting with medical treatment in patients with symptomatic vertebral stenosis. The primary outcome was any fatal or non-fatal stroke. Analyses were performed for vertebral stenosis at any location and separately for extracranial and intracranial stenoses. Data from the intention-to-treat analysis were used for all studies. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs using Cox proportional-hazards regression models stratified by trial. Data were from 354 individuals from three trials, including 179 patients from VIST (148 with extracranial stenosis and 31 with intracranial stenosis), 115 patients from VAST (96 with extracranial stenosis and 19 with intracranial stenosis), and 60 patients with intracranial stenosis from SAMMPRIS (no patients had extracranial stenosis). Across all trials, 168 participants (46 with intracranial stenosis and 122 with extracranial stenosis) were randomly assigned to medical treatment and 186 to stenting (64 with intracranial stenosis and 122 with extracranial stenosis). In the stenting group, the frequency of periprocedural stroke or death was higher for intracranial stenosis than for extracranial stenosis (ten (16%) of 64 patients vs one (1%) of 121 patients; p<0·0001). During 1036 person-years of follow-up, the hazard ratio (HR) for any stroke in the stenting group compared with the medical treatment group was 0·81% CI 0·45-1·44; p=0·47). For extracranial stenosis alone the HR was 0·63 (95% CI 0·27-1·46) and for intracranial stenosis alone it was 1·06 (0·46-2·42; pinteraction=0·395). Stenting for vertebral stenosis has a much higher risk for intracranial, compared with extracranial, stenosis. This pooled analysis did not show evidence of a benefit for stroke prevention for either treatment. There was no evidence of benefit of stenting for intracranial stenosis. Stenting for extracranial stenosis might be beneficial, but further larger trials are required to determine the treatment effect in this subgroup. None.