Patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage who are receiving factor Xa inhibitors have a risk of hematoma expansion. The effect of andexanet alfa, an agent that reverses the effects of factor Xa inhibitors, on hematoma volume expansion has not been well studied. We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients who had taken factor Xa inhibitors within 15 hours before having an acute intracerebral hemorrhage to receive andexanet or usual care. The primary end point was hemostatic efficacy, defined by expansion of the hematoma volume by 35% or less at 12 hours after baseline, an increase in the score on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale of less than 7 points (scores range from 0 to 42, with higher scores indicating worse neurologic deficit) at 12 hours, and no receipt of rescue therapy between 3 hours and 12 hours. Safety end points were thrombotic events and death. A total of 263 patients were assigned to receive andexanet, and 267 to receive usual care. Efficacy was assessed in an interim analysis that included 452 patients, and safety was analyzed in all 530 enrolled patients. Atrial fibrillation was the most common indication for factor Xa inhibitors. Of the patients receiving usual care, 85.5% received prothrombin complex concentrate. Hemostatic efficacy was achieved in 150 of 224 patients (67.0%) receiving andexanet and in 121 of 228 (53.1%) receiving usual care (adjusted difference, 13.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.6 to 22.2; P = 0.003). The median reduction from baseline to the 1-to-2-hour nadir in anti-factor Xa activity was 94.5% with andexanet and 26.9% with usual care (P<0.001). Thrombotic events occurred in 27 of 263 patients (10.3%) receiving andexanet and in 15 of 267 (5.6%) receiving usual care (difference, 4.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1 to 9.2; P = 0.048); ischemic stroke occurred in 17 patients (6.5%) and 4 patients (1.5%), respectively. There were no appreciable differences between the groups in the score on the modified Rankin scale or in death within 30 days. Among patients with intracerebral hemorrhage who were receiving factor Xa inhibitors, andexanet resulted in better control of hematoma expansion than usual care but was associated with thrombotic events, including ischemic stroke. (Funded by Alexion AstraZeneca Rare Disease and others; ANNEXA-I ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03661528.).

New therapeutic approaches are required for secondary prevention of residual vascular risk after stroke. Diverse sources of evidence support a causal role for inflammation in the pathogenesis of stroke. Randomized controlled trials of anti-inflammatory agents have reported benefit for secondary prevention in patients with coronary disease. We review the data from observational studies supporting a role for inflammation in pathogenesis of stroke, overview randomized controlled trials of anti-inflammatory therapy in cardiac disease and discuss the potential implications for stroke prevention therapy.

Within the last year, four randomised-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have been published comparing intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with tenecteplase and alteplase in acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) patients with a non-inferiority design for three of them. An expedited recommendation process was initiated by the European Stroke Organisation (ESO) and conducted according to ESO standard operating procedure based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. We identified three relevant Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome (PICO) questions, performed systematic reviews of the literature and meta-analyses, assessed the quality of the available evidence, and wrote evidence-based recommendations. Expert consensus statements were provided if insufficient evidence was available to provide recommendations based on the GRADE approach. For patients with AIS of <4.5 h duration who are eligible for IVT, tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg can be used as a safe and effective alternative to alteplase 0.9 mg/kg (moderate evidence, strong recommendation). For patients with AIS of <4.5 h duration who are eligible for IVT, we recommend against using tenecteplase at a dose of 0.40 mg/kg (low evidence, strong recommendation). For patients with AIS of <4.5 h duration with prehospital management with a mobile stroke unit who are eligible for IVT, we suggest tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg over alteplase 0.90 mg/kg (low evidence, weak recommendation). For patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) AIS of <4.5 h duration who are eligible for IVT, we recommend tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg over alteplase 0.9 mg/kg (moderate evidence, strong recommendation). For patients with AIS on awakening from sleep or AIS of unknown onset who are selected with non-contrast CT, we recommend against IVT with tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg (low evidence, strong recommendation). Expert consensus statements are also provided. Tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg may be favoured over alteplase 0.9 mg/kg for patients with AIS of <4.5 h duration in view of comparable safety and efficacy data and easier administration. For patients with LVO AIS of <4.5 h duration who are IVT-eligible, IVT with tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg is preferable over skipping IVT before MT, even in the setting of a direct admission to a thrombectomy-capable centre. IVT with tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg may be a reasonable alternative to alteplase 0.9 mg/kg for patients with AIS on awakening from sleep or AIS of unknown onset and who are IVT-eligible after selection with advanced imaging.

Accumulating evidence points toward a very high prevalence of prolonged neurological symptoms among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors. To date, there are no solidified criteria for ‘long-COVID’ diagnosis. Nevertheless, ‘long-COVID’ is conceptualized as a multi-organ disorder with a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations that may be indicative of underlying pulmonary, cardiovascular, endocrine, hematologic, renal, gastrointestinal, dermatologic, immunological, psychiatric, or neurological disease. Involvement of the central or peripheral nervous system is noted in more than one-third of patients with antecedent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, while an approximately threefold higher incidence of neurological symptoms is recorded in observational studies including patient-reported data. The most frequent neurological manifestations of ‘long-COVID’ encompass fatigue; ‘brain fog’; headache; cognitive impairment; sleep, mood, smell, or taste disorders; myalgias; sensorimotor deficits; and dysautonomia. Although very limited evidence exists to date on the pathophysiological mechanisms implicated in the manifestation of ‘long-COVID’, neuroinflammatory and oxidative stress processes are thought to prevail in propagating neurological ‘long-COVID’ sequelae. In this narrative review, we sought to present a comprehensive overview of our current understanding of clinical features, risk factors, and pathophysiological processes of neurological ‘long-COVID’ sequelae. Moreover, we propose diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms that may aid in the prompt recognition and management of underlying causes of neurological symptoms that persist beyond the resolution of acute COVID-19. Furthermore, as causal treatments for ‘long-COVID’ are currently unavailable, we propose therapeutic approaches for symptom-oriented management of neurological ‘long-COVID’ symptoms. In addition, we emphasize that collaborative research initiatives are urgently needed to expedite the development of preventive and therapeutic strategies for neurological ‘long-COVID’ sequelae.

Objective: It is not known whether patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) with ischemic stroke despite oral anticoagulant therapy are at increased risk for further recurrent strokes or how ongoing secondary prevention should be managed.Methods: We conducted an individual patient data pooled analysis of 7 prospective cohort studies that recruited patients with AF and recent cerebral ischemia. We compared patients taking oral anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonists [VKA] or direct oral anticoagulants [DOAC]) prior to index event (OAC_prior) with those without prior oral anticoagulation (OAC_naive). We further compared those who changed the type (ie, from VKA or DOAC, vice versa, or DOAC to DOAC) of anticoagulation (OAC_changed) with those who continued the same anticoagulation as secondary prevention (OAC_unchanged). Time to recurrent acute ischemic stroke (AIS) was analyzed using multivariate competing risk Fine–Gray models to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Results: We included 5,413 patients (median age = 78 years [interquartile range (IQR) = 71–84 years]; 5,136 [96.7%] had ischemic stroke as the index event, median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale on admission = 6 [IQR = 2–12]). The median CHA₂DS₂‐Vasc score (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age≥ 75 years, diabetes mellitus, stroke/transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, age 65–74 years, sex category) was 5 (IQR = 4–6) and was similar for OAC_prior (n = 1,195) and OAC_naive (n = 4,119, p = 0.103). During 6,128 patient‐years of follow‐up, 289 patients had AIS (4.7% per year, 95% CI = 4.2–5.3%). OAC_prior was associated with an increased risk of AIS (HR = 1.6, 95% CI = 1.2–2.3, p = 0.005). OAC_changed (n = 307) was not associated with decreased risk of AIS (HR = 1.2, 95% CI = 0.7–2.1, p = 0.415) compared with OAC_unchanged (n = 585).Interpretation: Patients with AF who have an ischemic stroke despite previous oral anticoagulation are at a higher risk for recurrent ischemic stroke despite a CHA₂DS₂‐Vasc score similar to those without prior oral anticoagulation. Better prevention strategies are needed for this high‐risk patient group. ANN NEUROL 2020;87:677–687