Objective To measure the global impact of COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of IV thrombolysis (IVT), IVT transfers, and stroke hospitalizations over 4 months at the height of the pandemic (March 1 to June 30, 2020) compared with 2 control 4-month periods. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional, observational, retrospective study across 6 continents, 70 countries, and 457 stroke centers. Diagnoses were identified by their ICD-10 codes or classifications in stroke databases. Results There were 91,373 stroke admissions in the 4 months immediately before compared to 80,894 admissions during the pandemic months, representing an 11.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] −11.7 to −11.3, p < 0.0001) decline. There were 13,334 IVT therapies in the 4 months preceding compared to 11,570 procedures during the pandemic, representing a 13.2% (95% CI −13.8 to −12.7, p < 0.0001) drop. Interfacility IVT transfers decreased from 1,337 to 1,178, or an 11.9% decrease (95% CI −13.7 to −10.3, p = 0.001). Recovery of stroke hospitalization volume (9.5%, 95% CI 9.2–9.8, p < 0.0001) was noted over the 2 later (May, June) vs the 2 earlier (March, April) pandemic months. There was a 1.48% stroke rate across 119,967 COVID-19 hospitalizations. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was noted in 3.3% (1,722/52,026) of all stroke admissions. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a global decline in the volume of stroke hospitalizations, IVT, and interfacility IVT transfers. Primary stroke centers and centers with higher COVID-19 inpatient volumes experienced steeper declines. Recovery of stroke hospitalization was noted in the later pandemic months.

Background and Purpose—: A large infarct and expanding cerebral edema (CED) due to a middle cerebral artery occlusion confers a 70% mortality unless treated surgically. Reperfusion may cause blood-brain barrier disruption and a risk for cerebral edema and secondary parenchymal hemorrhage (PH). We aimed to investigate the effect of recanalization on development of early CED and PH after recanalization therapy. Methods—: From the SITS-International Stroke Treatment Registry, we selected patients with signs of artery occlusion at baseline (either Hyperdense Artery Sign or computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging angiographic occlusion). We defined recanalization as the disappearance of radiological signs of occlusion at 22 to 36 hours. Primary outcome was moderate to severe CED and secondary outcome was PH on 22- to 36-hour imaging scans. We used logistic regression with adjustment for baseline variables and PH. Results—: Twenty two thousand one hundred eighty-four patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria (n=18 318 received intravenous thrombolysis, n=3071 received intravenous thrombolysis+thrombectomy, n=795 received thrombectomy). Recanalization occurred in 64.1%. Median age was 71 versus 71 years and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 15 versus 16 in the recanalized versus nonrecanalized patients respectively. Recanalized patients had a lower risk for CED (13.0% versus 23.6%), adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.52 (95% CI, 0.46–0.59), and a higher risk for PH (8.9% versus 6.5%), adjusted odds ratio, 1.37 (95% CI, 1.22–1.55), than nonrecanalized patients. Conclusions—: In patients with acute ischemic stroke, recanalization was associated with a lower risk for early CED even after adjustment for higher rate for PH in recanalized patients.

Background and Purpose: Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is indicated for the treatment of large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke. MT should be provided as quickly as possible; therefore, a test identifying suspected LVO in the prehospitalization stage is needed to ensure direct transport to a comprehensive stroke center (CSC). We assume that patients with clinically severe hemiparesis have a high probability of LVO stroke. We modified the FAST test into the FAST PLUS test: The first part is the FAST test and the second part evaluates the presence of severe arm or leg motor deficit. This prospective multicenter study evaluates the specificity and sensitivity of the FAST PLUS test in detecting LVO stroke.Methods: Paramedics were trained through e‐learning to conduct the FAST PLUS test.All prehospital suspected stroke patients who were administered the FAST PLUS test were included. Demographics, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, brain computed tomography (CT), and CT angiography (CTA) were recorded. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and receiver operating curve (ROC) area for LVO were calculated.Results: The study included 435 patients. LVO were found in 124 patients (28%). Sensitivity was 93%, specificity was 47%, PPV was 41%, NPV was 94%, and ROC area for ICA/MCA occlusion was 0.65. Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) was identified in 48 patients (11%).Conclusion: We found that the FAST PLUS test had a high sensitivity for LVO stroke. Of the 435 patients, 41% were all directly transported to a CSC based on positive FAST PLUS test scores and were potential candidates for MT.

Background: The benefit of intravenous thrombolysis is time dependent. It remains unclear, however, whether dramatic shortening of door‐to‐needle time (DNT) among different types of hospitals nationwide does not compromise safety and still improves outcome. Methods and Results: Multifaceted intervention to shorten DNT was introduced at a national level, and prospectively collected data from a registry between 2004 and 2019 were analyzed. Generalized estimating equation was used to identify the association between DNT and outcomes independently from prespecified baseline variables. The primary outcome was modified Rankin score 0 to 1 at 3 months, and secondary outcomes were parenchymal hemorrhage/intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), any ICH, and death. Of 31 316 patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis alone, 18 861 (60%) had available data: age 70±13 years, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale at baseline (median, 8; interquartile range, 5–14), and 45% men. DNT groups 0 to 20 minutes, 21 to 40 minutes, 41 to 60 minutes, and >60 minutes had 3536 (19%), 5333 (28%), 4856 (26%), and 5136 (27%) patients. National median DNT dropped from 74 minutes in 2004 to 22 minutes in 2019. Shorter DNT had proportional benefit: it increased the odds of achieving modified Rankin score 0 to 1 and decreased the odds of parenchymal hemorrhage/ICH, any ICH, and mortality. Patients with DNT ≤20 minutes, 21 to 40 minutes, and 41 to 60 minutes as compared with DNT >60 minutes had adjusted odds ratios for modified Rankin score 0 to 1 of the following: 1.30 (95% CI, 1.12–1.51), 1.33 (95% CI, 1.15–1.54), and 1.15 (95% CI, 1.02–1.29), and for parenchymal hemorrhage/ICH: 0.57 (95% CI, 0.45–0.71), 0.76 (95% CI, 0.61–0.94), 0.83 (95% CI, 0.70–0.99), respectively. Conclusions: Ultrashort initiation of thrombolysis is feasible, improves outcome, and makes treatments safer because of fewer intracerebral hemorrhages. Stroke management should be optimized to initiate thrombolysis as soon as possible optimally within 20 minutes from arrival to a hospital.

The safety and efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) are well established in anterior circulation stroke (ACS) but are much less clear for posterior circulation stroke (PCS). The aim of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of parenchymal hematoma (PH) and 3-month clinical outcomes after IVT in PCS and ACS. In an observational, cohort multicenter study, we analyzed data from ischemic stroke patients treated with IVT prospectively collected in the SITS (Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke) registry in the Czech Republic between 2004 and 2018. Out of 10,211 patients, 1166 (11.4%) had PCS, and 9045 (88.6%) ACS. PH was less frequent in PCS versus ACS patients: 3.6 vs. 5.9%, odds ratio (OR) = 0.594 in the whole set, 4.4 vs. 7.8%, OR = 0.543 in those with large vessel occlusion (LVO), and 2.2 vs. 4.7%, OR = 0.463 in those without LVO. At 3 months, PCS patients compared with ACS patients achieved more frequently excellent clinical outcomes (modified Rankin scale [mRS] 0–1: 55.5 vs. 47.6%, OR = 1.371 in the whole set and 49.2 vs. 37.6%, OR = 1.307 in those with LVO), good clinical outcomes (mRS 0–2: 69.9 vs. 62.8%, OR = 1.377 in the whole set and 64.5 vs. 50.5%, OR = 1.279 in those with LVO), and had lower mortality (12.4 vs. 16.6%, OR = 0.716 in the whole set and 18.4 vs. 25.5%, OR = 0.723 in those with LVO) (p < 0.05 in all cases). In PCS versus ACS patients, an extensive analysis showed a lower risk of PH both in patients with and without LVO, more frequent excellent and good clinical outcomes, and lower mortality 3 months after IVT in patients with LVO.