We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of thrombectomy for the treatment of stroke in a trial embedded within a population-based stroke reperfusion registry. During a 2-year period at four centers in Catalonia, Spain, we randomly assigned 206 patients who could be treated within 8 hours after the onset of symptoms of acute ischemic stroke to receive either medical therapy (including intravenous alteplase when eligible) and endovascular therapy with the Solitaire stent retriever (thrombectomy group) or medical therapy alone (control group). All patients had confirmed proximal anterior circulation occlusion and the absence of a large infarct on neuroimaging. In all study patients, the use of alteplase either did not achieve revascularization or was contraindicated. The primary outcome was the severity of global disability at 90 days, as measured on the modified Rankin scale (ranging from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]). Although the maximum planned sample size was 690, enrollment was halted early because of loss of equipoise after positive results for thrombectomy were reported from other similar trials. Thrombectomy reduced the severity of disability over the range of the modified Rankin scale (adjusted odds ratio for improvement of 1 point, 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05 to 2.8) and led to higher rates of functional independence (a score of 0 to 2) at 90 days (43.7% vs. 28.2%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1 to 4.0). At 90 days, the rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage were 1.9% in both the thrombectomy group and the control group (P=1.00), and rates of death were 18.4% and 15.5%, respectively (P=0.60). Registry data indicated that only eight patients who met the eligibility criteria were treated outside the trial at participating hospitals. Among patients with anterior circulation stroke who could be treated within 8 hours after symptom onset, stent retriever thrombectomy reduced the severity of post-stroke disability and increased the rate of functional independence. (Funded by Fundació Ictus Malaltia Vascular through an unrestricted grant from Covidien and others; REVASCAT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01692379.)

Over a period of 4 consecutive yr, 92 nonimmunosuppressed patients (21 women and 71 men aged 53 ± 16 yr, ± SD) with critical acute respiratory failure (PaO2/Fi O2, 209 ± 9 mm Hg) caused by severe community-acquired pneumonia were admitted to the respiratory intensive care unit (RICU) of a general hospital. The most frequent underlying clinical condition was chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (44 patients, 48%). A total of 56 patients (61%) required mechanical ventilation for a mean period of 10.7 ± 12.5 days, 29 of them (52%) needing PEEP (9.9 ± 3.8 cm H2O). A group of 23 (25%) patients had criteria of adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). A causal microorganism was identified in 48 patients (52%), the two most frequent etiologies being Streptococcus pneumonias (14, 15%) and Legionella pneumophila (13, 14%). Pseudomonas aeruginosa (5, 5%) was always associated with bronchiectasis. Mortality due to severe community-acquired pneumonia was 22% (20 patients). According to univariate analysis, mortality was associated with anticipated death within 4 to 5 yr, inadequate antibiotic treatment before RICU admission, mechanical ventilation requirements, use of PEEP, Fi O2 > 0.6, coexistence of ARDS, radiographic spread of the pneumonia during RICU admission, septic shock, bacteremia, and P. aeruginosa as the cause of the pneumonia. Further, recursive partitioning analysis selected two factors significantly related to the prognosis: the radiographic spread of the pneumonia during RICU admission and the presence of septic shock. Our statistical analysis could accurately predict prognosis in 75 patients (82%). Recommendations for antibiotic chemotherapy in these patients with both community-acquired pneumonia and severe acute respiratory failure are suggested.

Objective To investigate the effect of an additional review based on reporting guidelines such as STROBE and CONSORT on quality of manuscripts.Design Masked randomised trial.Population Original research manuscripts submitted to the Medicina Clínica journal from May 2008 to April 2009 and considered suitable for publication.Intervention Control group: conventional peer reviews alone. Intervention group: conventional review plus an additional review looking for missing items from reporting guidelines.Outcomes Manuscript quality, assessed with a 5 point Likert scale (primary: overall quality; secondary: average quality of specific items in paper). Main analysis compared groups as allocated, after adjustment for baseline factors (analysis of covariance); sensitivity analysis compared groups as reviewed. Adherence to reviewer suggestions assessed with Likert scale.Results Of 126 consecutive papers receiving conventional review, 34 were not suitable for publication. The remaining 92 papers were allocated to receive conventional reviews alone (n=41) or additional reviews (n=51). Four papers assigned to the conventional review group deviated from protocol; they received an additional review based on reporting guidelines. We saw an improvement in manuscript quality in favour of the additional review group (comparison as allocated, 0.25, 95% confidence interval –0.05 to 0.54; as reviewed, 0.33, 0.03 to 0.63). More papers with additional reviews than with conventional reviews alone improved from baseline (22 (43%) v eight (20%), difference 23.6% (3.2% to 44.0%), number needed to treat 4.2 (from 2.3 to 31.2), relative risk 2.21 (1.10 to 4.44)). Authors in the additional review group adhered more to suggestions from conventional reviews than to those from additional reviews (average increase 0.43 Likert points (0.19 to 0.67)).Conclusions Additional reviews based on reporting guidelines improve manuscript quality, although the observed effect was smaller than hypothesised and not definitively demonstrated. Authors adhere more to suggestions from conventional reviews than to those from additional reviews, showing difficulties in adhering to high methodological standards at the latest research phases. To boost paper quality and impact, authors should be aware of future requirements of reporting guidelines at the very beginning of their study. Trial registration and protocol Although registries do not include trials of peer review, the protocol design was submitted to sponsored research projects (Instituto de Salud Carlos III, PI081903).

General anaesthesia (GA) during endovascular thrombectomy has been associated with worse patient outcomes in observational studies compared with patients treated without GA. We assessed functional outcome in ischaemic stroke patients with large vessel anterior circulation occlusion undergoing endovascular thrombectomy under GA, versus thrombectomy not under GA (with or without sedation) versus standard care (ie, no thrombectomy), stratified by the use of GA versus standard care. For this meta-analysis, patient-level data were pooled from all patients included in randomised trials in PuMed published between Jan 1, 2010, and May 31, 2017, that compared endovascular thrombectomy predominantly done with stent retrievers with standard care in anterior circulation ischaemic stroke patients (HERMES Collaboration). The primary outcome was functional outcome assessed by ordinal analysis of the modified Rankin scale (mRS) at 90 days in the GA and non-GA subgroups of patients treated with endovascular therapy versus those patients treated with standard care, adjusted for baseline prognostic variables. To account for between-trial variance we used mixed-effects modelling with a random effect for trials incorporated in all models. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane method. The meta-analysis was prospectively designed, but not registered. Seven trials were identified by our search; of 1764 patients included in these trials, 871 were allocated to endovascular thrombectomy and 893 were assigned standard care. After exclusion of 74 patients (72 did not undergo the procedure and two had missing data on anaesthetic strategy), 236 (30%) of 797 patients who had endovascular procedures were treated under GA. At baseline, patients receiving GA were younger and had a shorter delay between stroke onset and randomisation but they had similar pre-treatment clinical severity compared with patients who did not have GA. Endovascular thrombectomy improved functional outcome at 3 months both in patients who had GA (adjusted common odds ratio (cOR) 1·52, 95% CI 1·09-2·11, p=0·014) and in those who did not have GA (adjusted cOR 2·33, 95% CI 1·75-3·10, p<0·0001) versus standard care. However, outcomes were significantly better for patients who did not receive GA versus those who received GA (covariate-adjusted cOR 1·53, 95% CI 1·14-2·04, p=0·0044). The risk of bias and variability between studies was assessed to be low. Worse outcomes after endovascular thrombectomy were associated with GA, after adjustment for baseline prognostic variables. These data support avoidance of GA whenever possible. The procedure did, however, remain effective versus standard care in patients treated under GA, indicating that treatment should not be withheld in those who require anaesthesia for medical reasons. Medtronic.

Background and Purpose— No single neuroprotective agent has been shown to influence outcome after acute stroke. Citicoline has been studied worldwide in many clinical trials with positive findings, but only 1 trial has obtained significant results in the primary efficacy variables. Our objective was to evaluate the effects of oral citicoline in patients with acute ischemic stroke by a data pooling analysis of clinical trials. The primary efficacy end point chosen was the common evaluation of recovery, combining National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale ≤1, modified Rankin Scale score ≤1, and Barthel Index ≥95 at 3 months using the generalized estimating equations analysis. Methods— A systematic search of all prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trials with oral citicoline (MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Ferrer Group bibliographic databases) was undertaken. Individual patient data were extracted from each study and pooled in a single data file. The main inclusion criteria included compatible neuroimaging with ischemic stroke, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale ≥8, and prior modified Rankin Scale score ≤1. Four clinical trials using various doses of oral citicoline (500, 1000, and 2000 mg) were identified. Results— Of 1652 randomized patients, 1372 fulfilled the inclusion criteria (583 received placebo, 789 received citicoline). Recovery at 3 months was 25.2% in citicoline-treated patients and 20.2% in placebo-treated patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.62; P =0.0034). The dose showing the largest difference with placebo was 2000 mg, with 27.9% of patients achieving recovery (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.72; P =0.0043). The overall safety of citicoline was similar to placebo. Conclusions— Treatment with oral citicoline within the first 24 hours after onset in patients with moderate to severe stroke increases the probability of complete recovery at 3 months.