Abstract 159: Trends in Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Prescription Patterns for Secondary Prevention in Patients With Noncardioembolic Ischemic Stroke

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying Xian ◽  
Peter Shrader ◽  
Eric Smith ◽  
Gregg C Fonarow ◽  
Deepak L Bhatt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Stroke Prevention ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Minor Stroke ◽  
Secondary Stroke Prevention ◽  
Class Iii ◽  
Prescription Patterns ◽  
Class Iib ◽  
Over Time

Background: The recommendations for dual antiplatelet (DAPT aspirin + clopidogrel) for secondary stroke prevention has evolved over time. Following the publication of CHANCE trial (07/2013), the AHA/ASA updated the DAPT recommendations from Class III harm (10/2010) for patient with noncardioembolic ischemic stroke, to Class IIb benefit ≥ risk (02/2014), and Class IIa benefit >> risk (03/2018) for a subgroup of patients with minor stroke (NIHSS≤3). Subsequent to the last guideline update, the POINT trial (05/2018) provided further support for the effectiveness of DAPT. Methods: We evaluated antiplatelet prescription patterns of 1,024,074 noncardioembolic ischemic stroke survivors (median age 65 years and 46% women) eligible for antiplatelet therapy (no contraindications) and discharged from the Get With The Guidelines-Stroke Hospitals between Q1 2011 and Q1 2019. Results: Baseline patient characteristics were similar within the four periods: pre-CHANCE (01/2011-07/2013), pre-2014 guideline update (08/2013-02/2014), pre-POINT/2018 guideline update (03/2014-05/2018), and post-POINT (06/2018-03/2019). Use of DAPT gradually increased from 16.7% in the pre-CHANCE period, to 19.4% pre-2014 guideline update, 23.3% pre-POINT/2018 guideline update, and 29.8% post-POINT period (p<0.001, Figure). Yet increase in DAPT use was observed over time for individuals with NIHSS≤3 (17.1%, 19.9%, 24.1%, and 31.4%, p<0.001) and those with NIHSS>3 (18.7%, 22.8%, 28.3%, and 28.3%, p<0.001). Conclusions: A sustained increase in DAPT use for secondary stroke prevention was observed after publication of pivotal trials and AHA guideline updates. While recommended for minor strokes or TIA only, such increase was also observed in ischemic stroke patients with NIHSS>3, where the risk-benefit ratio of DAPT remains to be established.

scholarly journals Benefits and Risks of Dual Versus Single Antiplatelet Therapy for Secondary Stroke Prevention: A Systematic Review for the 2021 Guideline for the Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Stroke and Transient Ischemic Attack

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Devin L. Brown ◽  
Deborah A. Levine ◽  
Karen Albright ◽  
Moira K. Kapral ◽  
Lester Y. Leung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Transient Ischemic Attack ◽  
Stroke Prevention ◽  
Treatment Duration ◽  
Minor Stroke ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Ischemic Attack

BACKGROUND: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack may reduce recurrent stroke but also increase severe bleeding compared with single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT). The American Heart Association/American Stroke Association convened an evidence review committee to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the benefits and risks of DAPT compared with SAPT for secondary ischemic stroke prevention. METHODS: The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched on December 5, 2019, to identify phase III or IV randomized controlled trials (n≥100) from December 1999 to December 2019. We calculated unadjusted relative risks (RRs) and performed meta-analyses of studies based on the duration of treatment (short [≤90 days] versus long [>90 days]). RESULTS: Three short-duration randomized controlled trials were identified that enrolled mostly patients with minor stroke or high risk transient ischemic attack. In these trials, DAPT, compared with SAPT, was associated with a lower 90-day risk of recurrent ischemic stroke (pooled RR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.55–0.83], I 2 =37.1%). There was no significant increase in major bleeding with DAPT in short-duration trials (pooled RR, 1.88 [95% CI, 0.93–3.83], I 2 =8.9%). In 2 long-duration treatment randomized controlled trials (mean treatment duration, 18-40 months), DAPT was not associated with a significant reduction in recurrent ischemic stroke (pooled RR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.79–1.02], I 2 =1.4%), but was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding (pooled RR, 2.42 [95% CI, 1.37–4.30], I 2 =75.5%). CONCLUSIONS: DAPT was more effective than SAPT for prevention of secondary ischemic stroke when initiated early after the onset of minor stroke/high-risk transient ischemic attack and treatment duration was <90 days. However, when the treatment duration was longer and initiated later after stroke or transient ischemic attack onset, DAPT was not more effective than SAPT for ischemic stroke prevention and it increased the risk of bleeding.

Abstract P252: Discharge Antithrombotic Therapy for Ischemic Stroke Patients With Prior Aspirin Failure

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying Xian ◽  
Haolin Xu ◽  
Deepak L Bhatt ◽  
Gregg C Fonarow ◽  
Eric E Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Stroke Prevention ◽  
Antithrombotic Therapy ◽  
Recurrent Stroke ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
The United States ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Large Artery ◽  
Secondary Stroke Prevention ◽  
Stroke Registry

Introduction: Aspirin is one of the most commonly used medications for cardiovascular disease and stroke prevention. Many older patients who present with a first or recurrent stroke are already on aspirin monotherapy, yet little evidence is available to guide antithrombotic strategies for these patients. Method: Using data from the American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-Stroke Registry, we described discharge antithrombotic treatment pattern among Medicare beneficiaries without atrial fibrillation who were discharged alive for acute ischemic stroke from 1734 hospitals in the United States between October 2012 and December 2017. Results: Of 261,634 ischemic stroke survivors, 100,016 (38.2%) were on prior aspirin monotherapy (median age 78 years; 53% women; 79.4% initial stroke and 20.6% recurrent stroke). The most common discharge antithrombotics (Figure) were 81 mg aspirin monotherapy (20.9%), 325 mg aspirin monotherapy (18.2%), clopidogrel monotherapy (17.8%), and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) of 81 mg aspirin and clopidogrel (17.1%). Combined, aspirin monotherapy, clopidogrel monotherapy, and DAPT accounted for 86.8% of discharge antithrombotics. The rest of 13.2% were discharged on either aspirin/dipyridamole, warfarin or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants with or without antiplatelet, or no antithrombotics at all. Among patients with documented stroke etiology (TOAST criteria), 81 mg aspirin monotherapy (21.2-24.0%) was the most commonly prescribed antithrombotic for secondary stroke prevention. The only exception was those with large-artery atherosclerosis, in which, 25.3% received DAPT of 81 mg aspirin and clopidogrel at discharge. Conclusion: Substantial variations exist in discharge antithrombotic therapy for secondary stroke prevention in ischemic stroke with prior aspirin failure. Future research is needed to identify best management strategies to care for this complex but common clinical scenario.

Abstract 104: Disability After Minor Stroke and TIA in the POINT Trial

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brett L Cucchiara ◽  
Jordan Elm ◽  
J Donald Easton ◽  
Shelagh Coutts ◽  
Joshua Willey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Dual Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Recurrent Stroke ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Minor Stroke ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Index Event

Background and Purpose: To assess the effect of combination antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel versus aspirin alone on disability following TIA or minor stroke and to identify factors associated with disability. Methods: The POINT trial randomized patients with TIA or minor stroke (NIHSS≤3) within 12 hours of onset to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin plus clopidogrel versus aspirin alone. The primary outcome measure was a composite of stroke, MI, or vascular death. We performed a post-hoc exploratory analysis to examine the effect of treatment on overall disability (defined as mRS>1) at 90 days as well as disability ascribed by the local investigator to index or recurrent stroke. We also evaluated predictors of disability. Results: At 90 days, 188/1964 (9.6%) of patients enrolled with TIA and 471/2586 (18.2%) of those enrolled with stroke were disabled. Overall disability was similar between patients assigned DAPT versus aspirin alone (14.7% vs. 14.3%, OR 0.97, 95%CI 0.82-1.14, p=0.69). However, there were numerically fewer patients with disability in conjunction with a primary outcome event in the DAPT arm (3.0% vs. 4.0%, OR 0.73, 95%CI 0.53-1.01, p=0.06), and significantly fewer patients in the DAPT arm with disability attributed by the investigators to either the index event or recurrent stroke (5.9% vs. 7.4%, OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62-0.99, p=0.04). Notably, disability attributed to the index event accounted for the majority of this difference (4.5% vs. 6.0%, OR 0.74 95% CI 0.57-0.96, p=0.02). In multivariate analysis of patients enrolled with TIA, disability was significantly associated with age, subsequent ischemic stroke, serious adverse events, and major bleeding. In patients enrolled with stroke, disability was associated with female sex, hypertension, diabetes, NIHSS score, recurrent ischemic stroke, subsequent myocardial infarction, and serious adverse events. Conclusions: In addition to reducing recurrent stroke in patients with acute minor stroke and TIA, dual antiplatelet therapy might reduce stroke-related disability.

Abstract P311: Outpatient Evaluation of Transient Ischemic Attack and Minor, Non-Disabling Stroke During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Wechsler ◽  
Babak B Navi ◽  
Alan Z Segal ◽  
Neal S Parikh ◽  
Halina White
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Emergency Room ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Transient Global Amnesia ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Minor Stroke ◽  
Laboratory Diagnostics ◽  
Global Amnesia

Introduction: Reductions in hospital visits for stroke have been seen during the COVID-19 pandemic, partly reflecting perceived risks of in-hospital care. We recently implemented an evidence-based protocol for outpatient rapid evaluation of transient and minor, non-disabling stroke symptoms for patients seeking care 24 hours after symptom onset. We present our early experience through the pandemic. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients evaluated in the RESCUE-TIA ( R apid E valuation of minor S troke and C erebrovasc U lar E vents including TIA ) clinic from December 2019-August 2020. The clinic sees patients with TIA symptoms or with fixed, non-disabling deficits seeking care > 24 hours after symptom onset. We introduced telemedicine in March 2020. Magnetic resonance brain and vascular imaging is available within 24 hours of visit. We summarized patient characteristics and quality data with standard descriptive statistics. Results: A total of 21 patients were seen in the RESCUE-TIA clinic, including 15 patients during the height of the pandemic in NY; 67% were seen by telemedicine. The median age was 75 years (interquartile range [IQR], 61-82), and 71% were women. The median NIH Stroke Score for patients with minor stroke was 0 (IQR, 0-1), and the median ABCD 2 score for TIA patients was 3 (IQR, 2-3). Median time from symptom onset to evaluation was 3 days (IQR, 2.5-17.5). Median time from evaluation to laboratory diagnostics was 8 hours (IQR, 2-21), and to completion of imaging was 1 day (IQR, 0-5). Outpatient telemetry commenced in a median of 5 days (IQR, 1-9), and echocardiography was completed in a median of 8 days (IQR, 0-10). One patient was referred to the emergency room for a carotid occlusion. Final diagnoses were TIA (n=12), ischemic stroke (n=5), transient global amnesia (n=2), migraine (n=1), and non-aneurysmal, distal subarachnoid hemorrhage (n=1). Secondary prevention was initiated or optimized in 94% of TIA and stroke patients. Recurrent TIA occurred in 1 patient after 67 days, and ischemic stroke occurred in 1 patient 55 days after TIA. Conclusion: Timely outpatient evaluation of patients with recent TIA and minor, non-disabling stroke is feasible and may be useful during the pandemic, especially during emergency room crowding.

Abstract WMP112: Cilostazol versus Aspirin for Secondary Stroke Prevention: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle P Lin ◽  
Kevin M Barrett ◽  
James F Meschia ◽  
Benjamin H Eidelman ◽  
Josephine F Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Random Effects ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Stroke Prevention ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Secondary Stroke Prevention

Introduction: Cilostazol has promise as an alternative to aspirin for secondary stroke prevention given its vasodilatory and anti-inflammatory properties in addition to platelet aggregation inhibition. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the comparative effectiveness and safety of cilostazol compared to aspirin for stroke prevention in patients with previous stroke or TIA. Hypothesis: Cilostazol is more effective than aspirin in preventing recurrent ischemic stroke with lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage and bleeding. Methods: We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to 2019. Randomized clinical trials that compared cilostazol vs aspirin and reported the endpoints of ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage and bleeding were included. A random-effects estimate was computed based on Mantel-Haenszel methods. The pooled estimates with 95% confidence intervals were compared between cilostazol and aspirin and displayed as forest plots (Figure). Results: The search identified 5 randomized clinical trials comparing cilostazol vs aspirin for secondary stroke prevention that enrolled 7,240 patients from primarily Asian countries (3,615 received cilostazol and 3,625 received aspirin). The pooled results from the random-effects model showed that cilostazol was associated with significantly lower risk of recurrent ischemic stroke (Hazard ratio [HR] 0.70; 95%CI, 0.54-0.89), intracranial hemorrhage (HR 0.41; 95%CI, 0.25-0.65) and bleeding (HR 0.71; 95%CI, 0.55-0.91). See forest plots. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests cilostazol is more effective than aspirin in the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke with lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage and bleeding. Confirmatory randomized trials of cilostazol for secondary stroke prevention to be performed in more generalizable populations are needed.

Antiplatelet therapy in secondary stroke prevention

2000 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradford B. Worrall ◽  
Karen C. Johnston
Keyword(s):  
Antiplatelet Therapy ◽  
Stroke Prevention ◽  
Secondary Stroke Prevention
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document