1.Combining Computed Tomography Perfusion and Baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale to Assess the Clinical Penumbra in Ischemic Stroke
Umberto PENSATO ; Alexander STEBNER ; Salome BOSSHART ; Ruchir SHAH ; Axel ROHR ; Ricardo HANEL ; Michael E. KELLY ; Aditya BHARATHA ; Michael D. HILL ; Mayank GOYAL ; Andrew M. DEMCHUK ; Johanna M. OSPEL
Journal of Stroke 2025;27(2):270-274
2.Combining Computed Tomography Perfusion and Baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale to Assess the Clinical Penumbra in Ischemic Stroke
Umberto PENSATO ; Alexander STEBNER ; Salome BOSSHART ; Ruchir SHAH ; Axel ROHR ; Ricardo HANEL ; Michael E. KELLY ; Aditya BHARATHA ; Michael D. HILL ; Mayank GOYAL ; Andrew M. DEMCHUK ; Johanna M. OSPEL
Journal of Stroke 2025;27(2):270-274
3.Combining Computed Tomography Perfusion and Baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale to Assess the Clinical Penumbra in Ischemic Stroke
Umberto PENSATO ; Alexander STEBNER ; Salome BOSSHART ; Ruchir SHAH ; Axel ROHR ; Ricardo HANEL ; Michael E. KELLY ; Aditya BHARATHA ; Michael D. HILL ; Mayank GOYAL ; Andrew M. DEMCHUK ; Johanna M. OSPEL
Journal of Stroke 2025;27(2):270-274
4.Risk of Incident Cancer in Veterans with Diabetes Who Use Metformin Versus Sulfonylureas
Maya M. ABDALLAH ; Beatriz Desanti de OLIVEIRA ; Clark DUMONTIER ; Ariela R. ORKABY ; Lisa NUSSBAUM ; Michael GAZIANO ; Luc DJOUSSE ; David GAGNON ; Kelly CHO ; Sarah R. PREIS ; Jane A. DRIVER
Journal of Cancer Prevention 2024;29(4):140-147
Prior research suggests metformin has anti-cancer effects, yet data are limited. We examined the association between diabetes treatment (metformin versus sulfonylurea) and risk of incident diabetes-related and non- diabetes-related cancers in US veterans.This retrospective cohort study included US veterans, without cancer, aged ≥ 55 years, who were new users of metformin or sulfo-nylureas for diabetes between 2001 to 2012. Cox proportional hazards models, with propensity score-matched inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were constructed. A total of 88,713 veterans (mean age 68.6 ± 7.8 years; 97.7% male; 84.1% White, 12.6% Black, 3.3% other race) were followed for 4.2 ± 3.0 years. Among metformin users (n = 60,476), there were 858 incident diabetes-related cancers (crude incidence rate [IR; per 1,000 person-years] = 3.4) and 3,533 non-diabetes-related cancers (IR = 14.1). Among sulfonylurea users (n = 28,237), there were 675 incident diabetes-related cancers (IR = 5.5) and 2,316 non-diabetes-related cancers (IR = 18.9). After IPTW adjustment, metformin use was associated with a lower risk of incident diabetes-related cancer (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.66, 95% CI 0.58-0.75) compared to sulfonylurea use. There was no association between treatment group (metformin versus sulfonylurea) and non-diabetes-related cancer (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.89-1.02). Of diabetes-related cancers, metformin users had lower incidence of liver (HR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.28-0.53), colorectal (HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.62-0.92), and esophageal cancers (HR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.36-0.81). Among US veterans, metformin users had lower incidence of diabetes-related cancer, particularly liver, colorectal, and esophageal cancers, as compared to sulfonylurea users. Use of metformin was not associated with non-diabetes-related cancer. Further studies are needed to understand how metformin use impacts cancer incidence in different patient populations.
5.Risk of Incident Cancer in Veterans with Diabetes Who Use Metformin Versus Sulfonylureas
Maya M. ABDALLAH ; Beatriz Desanti de OLIVEIRA ; Clark DUMONTIER ; Ariela R. ORKABY ; Lisa NUSSBAUM ; Michael GAZIANO ; Luc DJOUSSE ; David GAGNON ; Kelly CHO ; Sarah R. PREIS ; Jane A. DRIVER
Journal of Cancer Prevention 2024;29(4):140-147
Prior research suggests metformin has anti-cancer effects, yet data are limited. We examined the association between diabetes treatment (metformin versus sulfonylurea) and risk of incident diabetes-related and non- diabetes-related cancers in US veterans.This retrospective cohort study included US veterans, without cancer, aged ≥ 55 years, who were new users of metformin or sulfo-nylureas for diabetes between 2001 to 2012. Cox proportional hazards models, with propensity score-matched inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were constructed. A total of 88,713 veterans (mean age 68.6 ± 7.8 years; 97.7% male; 84.1% White, 12.6% Black, 3.3% other race) were followed for 4.2 ± 3.0 years. Among metformin users (n = 60,476), there were 858 incident diabetes-related cancers (crude incidence rate [IR; per 1,000 person-years] = 3.4) and 3,533 non-diabetes-related cancers (IR = 14.1). Among sulfonylurea users (n = 28,237), there were 675 incident diabetes-related cancers (IR = 5.5) and 2,316 non-diabetes-related cancers (IR = 18.9). After IPTW adjustment, metformin use was associated with a lower risk of incident diabetes-related cancer (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.66, 95% CI 0.58-0.75) compared to sulfonylurea use. There was no association between treatment group (metformin versus sulfonylurea) and non-diabetes-related cancer (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.89-1.02). Of diabetes-related cancers, metformin users had lower incidence of liver (HR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.28-0.53), colorectal (HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.62-0.92), and esophageal cancers (HR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.36-0.81). Among US veterans, metformin users had lower incidence of diabetes-related cancer, particularly liver, colorectal, and esophageal cancers, as compared to sulfonylurea users. Use of metformin was not associated with non-diabetes-related cancer. Further studies are needed to understand how metformin use impacts cancer incidence in different patient populations.
6.Risk of Incident Cancer in Veterans with Diabetes Who Use Metformin Versus Sulfonylureas
Maya M. ABDALLAH ; Beatriz Desanti de OLIVEIRA ; Clark DUMONTIER ; Ariela R. ORKABY ; Lisa NUSSBAUM ; Michael GAZIANO ; Luc DJOUSSE ; David GAGNON ; Kelly CHO ; Sarah R. PREIS ; Jane A. DRIVER
Journal of Cancer Prevention 2024;29(4):140-147
Prior research suggests metformin has anti-cancer effects, yet data are limited. We examined the association between diabetes treatment (metformin versus sulfonylurea) and risk of incident diabetes-related and non- diabetes-related cancers in US veterans.This retrospective cohort study included US veterans, without cancer, aged ≥ 55 years, who were new users of metformin or sulfo-nylureas for diabetes between 2001 to 2012. Cox proportional hazards models, with propensity score-matched inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were constructed. A total of 88,713 veterans (mean age 68.6 ± 7.8 years; 97.7% male; 84.1% White, 12.6% Black, 3.3% other race) were followed for 4.2 ± 3.0 years. Among metformin users (n = 60,476), there were 858 incident diabetes-related cancers (crude incidence rate [IR; per 1,000 person-years] = 3.4) and 3,533 non-diabetes-related cancers (IR = 14.1). Among sulfonylurea users (n = 28,237), there were 675 incident diabetes-related cancers (IR = 5.5) and 2,316 non-diabetes-related cancers (IR = 18.9). After IPTW adjustment, metformin use was associated with a lower risk of incident diabetes-related cancer (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.66, 95% CI 0.58-0.75) compared to sulfonylurea use. There was no association between treatment group (metformin versus sulfonylurea) and non-diabetes-related cancer (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.89-1.02). Of diabetes-related cancers, metformin users had lower incidence of liver (HR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.28-0.53), colorectal (HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.62-0.92), and esophageal cancers (HR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.36-0.81). Among US veterans, metformin users had lower incidence of diabetes-related cancer, particularly liver, colorectal, and esophageal cancers, as compared to sulfonylurea users. Use of metformin was not associated with non-diabetes-related cancer. Further studies are needed to understand how metformin use impacts cancer incidence in different patient populations.
7.Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: Is the Feasible Option of Minimally Invasive Surgery using Posterior Approach?
Hong Jin KIM ; Lawrence G. LENKE ; Javier PIZONES ; René CASTELEIN ; Per D. TROBISCH ; Mitsuru YAGI ; Michael P. KELLY ; Dong-Gune CHANG
Asian Spine Journal 2024;18(2):287-300
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of previous studies on minimally invasive scoliosis surgery (MISS) in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Some data on MISS in AIS compared with conventional open scoliosis surgery (COSS) are conflicting. A systematic literature search was conducted in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library, including studies reporting outcomes for MISS in AIS. The meta-analysis compared the operative, radiological, and clinical outcomes and complications between MISS and COSS in patients with AIS. Of the 208 records identified, 15 nonrandomized studies with 1,369 patients (reviews and case reports are excluded) were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The mean scale was 6.1, and eight of the 15 included studies showed satisfactory quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. For operative outcomes, MISS had significant benefits in terms of estimated blood loss (standard mean difference [SMD], -1.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.94 to -0.91) and hospitalization days (SMD, -2.99; 95% CI, -4.45 to -1.53) compared with COSS. However, COSS showed significantly favorable outcomes for operative times (SMD, 1.71; 95% CI, 0.92–2.51). No significant differences were observed in radiological outcomes, including Cobb’s angle of the main curve and thoracic kyphosis. For clinical outcomes, MISS showed significant benefits on the visual analog scale score (SMD, -0.91; 95% CI, -1.36 to -0.47). The overall complication rates of MISS were similar to those of COSS (SMD, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.61–1.52). MISS using the posterior approach provides equivalent radiological and clinical outcomes and complication rates compared with COSS. Considering the lower estimated blood loss, shorter hospitalization days, and longer operative times in MISS, COSS is still the mainstay of surgical treatment in AIS; however, MISS using the posterior approach is also one of the surgical options of choice in the case of moderate AIS.
8.Reliability of the Sundsvall Method for Femoral Offset Evaluation
Patrick KELLY ; Caitlin GRANT ; Niall COCHRANE ; Jonathan FLORANCE ; Michael BOLOGNESI ; Sean RYAN
Hip & Pelvis 2024;36(3):218-222
Purpose:
Acetabular and femoral offset (FO) play an important role in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The Sundsvall method has been proposed to account for both FO and cup offset in one global hip offset measurement. In this study, we examine the agreement and inter-observer reliability of the Sundsvall method of hip offset measurement.
Materials and Methods:
Four hundred and ninety-nine THA patients at a single tertiary academic institution were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative hip offset was measured on anteroposterior radiographs of the pelvis on the operative and contralateral side. Hip offset was also measured postoperatively on the operative side. Hip offset was measured using the Sundsvall method as the distance between the femoral axis and midline of the pelvis at the height of the lateral most point of the greater trochanter. All measurements were completed by two raters. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) and Pearson’s correlation coefficients were used to evaluate agreement and inter-observer reliability between two raters.
Results:
There was excellent agreement between raters for preoperative hip offset measurement with an ICC of 0.91 (confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.93, P<0.01) and R=0.92. There was excellent agreement between raters for postoperative hip offset with an ICC of 0.93 (CI 0.92-0.94, P<0.01) and R=0.93.
Conclusion
This study confirms the inter-observer agreement and reliability of the Sundsvall method of hip offset measurement. With its high agreement and reliability, the Sundsvall method is an easy and reliable way to measure hip offset that can be applied in future clinical and research settings.
9.How Do Quantitative Tissue Imaging Outcomes in Acute Ischemic Stroke Relate to Clinical Outcomes?
Johanna M. OSPEL ; Leon RINKEL ; Aravind GANESH ; Andrew DEMCHUK ; Manraj HERAN ; Eric SAUVAGEAU ; Manish JOSHI ; Diogo HAUSSEN ; Mahesh JAYARAMAN ; Shelagh COUTTS ; Amy YU ; Volker PUETZ ; Dana IANCU ; Oh Young BANG ; Jason TARPLEY ; Staffan HOLMIN ; Michael KELLY ; Michael TYMIANSKI ; Michael HILL ; Mayank GOYAL ;
Journal of Stroke 2024;26(2):252-259
Background:
and Purpose Infarct volume and other imaging markers are increasingly used as surrogate measures for clinical outcome in acute ischemic stroke research, but how improvements in these imaging surrogates translate into better clinical outcomes is currently unclear. We investigated how changes in infarct volume at 24 hours alter the probability of achieving good clinical outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0–2).
Methods:
Data are from endovascular thrombectomy patients from the randomized controlled ESCAPE-NA1 (Efficacy and Safety of Nerinetide for the Treatment of Acute Ischaemic Stroke) trial. Infarct volume at 24 hours was manually segmented on non-contrast computed tomography or diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Probabilities of achieving good outcome based on infarct volume were obtained from a multivariable logistic regression model. The probability of good outcome was plotted against infarct volume using linear spline regression.
Results:
A total of 1,099 patients were included in the analysis (median final infarct volume 24.9 mL [interquartile range: 6.6–92.2]). The relationship between total infarct volume and good outcome probability was nearly linear for infarct volumes between 0 mL and 250 mL. In this range, a 10% increase in the probability of achieving mRS 0–2 required a decrease in infarct volume of approximately 34.0 mL (95% confidence interval: -32.5 to -35.6). At infarct volumes above 250 mL, the probability of achieving mRS 0–2 probability was near zero. The relationships of tissue-specific infarct volumes and parenchymal hemorrhage volume generally showed similar patterns, although variability was high.
Conclusion
There seems to be a near-linear association between total infarct volume and probability of achieving good outcome for infarcts up to 250 mL, whereas patients with infarct volumes greater than 250 mL are highly unlikely to have a favorable outcome.
10.Global Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cerebral Venous Thrombosis and Mortality
Thanh N. NGUYEN ; Muhammad M. QURESHI ; Piers KLEIN ; Hiroshi YAMAGAMI ; Mohamad ABDALKADER ; Robert MIKULIK ; Anvitha SATHYA ; Ossama Yassin MANSOUR ; Anna CZLONKOWSKA ; Hannah LO ; Thalia S. FIELD ; Andreas CHARIDIMOU ; Soma BANERJEE ; Shadi YAGHI ; James E. SIEGLER ; Petra SEDOVA ; Joseph KWAN ; Diana Aguiar DE SOUSA ; Jelle DEMEESTERE ; Violiza INOA ; Setareh Salehi OMRAN ; Liqun ZHANG ; Patrik MICHEL ; Davide STRAMBO ; João Pedro MARTO ; Raul G. NOGUEIRA ; ; Espen Saxhaug KRISTOFFERSEN ; Georgios TSIVGOULIS ; Virginia Pujol LEREIS ; Alice MA ; Christian ENZINGER ; Thomas GATTRINGER ; Aminur RAHMAN ; Thomas BONNET ; Noémie LIGOT ; Sylvie DE RAEDT ; Robin LEMMENS ; Peter VANACKER ; Fenne VANDERVORST ; Adriana Bastos CONFORTO ; Raquel C.T. HIDALGO ; Daissy Liliana MORA CUERVO ; Luciana DE OLIVEIRA NEVES ; Isabelle LAMEIRINHAS DA SILVA ; Rodrigo Targa MARTÍNS ; Letícia C. REBELLO ; Igor Bessa SANTIAGO ; Teodora SADELAROVA ; Rosen KALPACHKI ; Filip ALEXIEV ; Elena Adela CORA ; Michael E. KELLY ; Lissa PEELING ; Aleksandra PIKULA ; Hui-Sheng CHEN ; Yimin CHEN ; Shuiquan YANG ; Marina ROJE BEDEKOVIC ; Martin ČABAL ; Dusan TENORA ; Petr FIBRICH ; Pavel DUŠEK ; Helena HLAVÁČOVÁ ; Emanuela HRABANOVSKA ; Lubomír JURÁK ; Jana KADLČÍKOVÁ ; Igor KARPOWICZ ; Lukáš KLEČKA ; Martin KOVÁŘ ; Jiří NEUMANN ; Hana PALOUŠKOVÁ ; Martin REISER ; Vladimir ROHAN ; Libor ŠIMŮNEK ; Ondreij SKODA ; Miroslav ŠKORŇA ; Martin ŠRÁMEK ; Nicolas DRENCK ; Khalid SOBH ; Emilie LESAINE ; Candice SABBEN ; Peggy REINER ; Francois ROUANET ; Daniel STRBIAN ; Stefan BOSKAMP ; Joshua MBROH ; Simon NAGEL ; Michael ROSENKRANZ ; Sven POLI ; Götz THOMALLA ; Theodoros KARAPANAYIOTIDES ; Ioanna KOUTROULOU ; Odysseas KARGIOTIS ; Lina PALAIODIMOU ; José Dominguo BARRIENTOS GUERRA ; Vikram HUDED ; Shashank NAGENDRA ; Chintan PRAJAPATI ; P.N. SYLAJA ; Achmad Firdaus SANI ; Abdoreza GHOREISHI ; Mehdi FARHOUDI ; Elyar SADEGHI HOKMABADI ; Mazyar HASHEMILAR ; Sergiu Ionut SABETAY ; Fadi RAHAL ; Maurizio ACAMPA ; Alessandro ADAMI ; Marco LONGONI ; Raffaele ORNELLO ; Leonardo RENIERI ; Michele ROMOLI ; Simona SACCO ; Andrea SALMAGGI ; Davide SANGALLI ; Andrea ZINI ; Kenichiro SAKAI ; Hiroki FUKUDA ; Kyohei FUJITA ; Hirotoshi IMAMURA ; Miyake KOSUKE ; Manabu SAKAGUCHI ; Kazutaka SONODA ; Yuji MATSUMARU ; Nobuyuki OHARA ; Seigo SHINDO ; Yohei TAKENOBU ; Takeshi YOSHIMOTO ; Kazunori TOYODA ; Takeshi UWATOKO ; Nobuyuki SAKAI ; Nobuaki YAMAMOTO ; Ryoo YAMAMOTO ; Yukako YAZAWA ; Yuri SUGIURA ; Jang-Hyun BAEK ; Si Baek LEE ; Kwon-Duk SEO ; Sung-Il SOHN ; Jin Soo LEE ; Anita Ante ARSOVSKA ; Chan Yong CHIEH ; Wan Asyraf WAN ZAIDI ; Wan Nur Nafisah WAN YAHYA ; Fernando GONGORA-RIVERA ; Manuel MARTINEZ-MARINO ; Adrian INFANTE-VALENZUELA ; Diederik DIPPEL ; Dianne H.K. VAN DAM-NOLEN ; Teddy Y. WU ; Martin PUNTER ; Tajudeen Temitayo ADEBAYO ; Abiodun H. BELLO ; Taofiki Ajao SUNMONU ; Kolawole Wasiu WAHAB ; Antje SUNDSETH ; Amal M. AL HASHMI ; Saima AHMAD ; Umair RASHID ; Liliana RODRIGUEZ-KADOTA ; Miguel Ángel VENCES ; Patrick Matic YALUNG ; Jon Stewart Hao DY ; Waldemar BROLA ; Aleksander DĘBIEC ; Malgorzata DOROBEK ; Michal Adam KARLINSKI ; Beata M. LABUZ-ROSZAK ; Anetta LASEK-BAL ; Halina SIENKIEWICZ-JAROSZ ; Jacek STASZEWSKI ; Piotr SOBOLEWSKI ; Marcin WIĄCEK ; Justyna ZIELINSKA-TUREK ; André Pinho ARAÚJO ; Mariana ROCHA ; Pedro CASTRO ; Patricia FERREIRA ; Ana Paiva NUNES ; Luísa FONSECA ; Teresa PINHO E MELO ; Miguel RODRIGUES ; M Luis SILVA ; Bogdan CIOPLEIAS ; Adela DIMITRIADE ; Cristian FALUP-PECURARIU ; May Adel HAMID ; Narayanaswamy VENKETASUBRAMANIAN ; Georgi KRASTEV ; Jozef HARING ; Oscar AYO-MARTIN ; Francisco HERNANDEZ-FERNANDEZ ; Jordi BLASCO ; Alejandro RODRÍGUEZ-VÁZQUEZ ; Antonio CRUZ-CULEBRAS ; Francisco MONICHE ; Joan MONTANER ; Soledad PEREZ-SANCHEZ ; María Jesús GARCÍA SÁNCHEZ ; Marta GUILLÁN RODRÍGUEZ ; Gianmarco BERNAVA ; Manuel BOLOGNESE ; Emmanuel CARRERA ; Anchalee CHUROJANA ; Ozlem AYKAC ; Atilla Özcan ÖZDEMIR ; Arsida BAJRAMI ; Songul SENADIM ; Syed I. HUSSAIN ; Seby JOHN ; Kailash KRISHNAN ; Robert LENTHALL ; Kaiz S. ASIF ; Kristine BELOW ; Jose BILLER ; Michael CHEN ; Alex CHEBL ; Marco COLASURDO ; Alexandra CZAP ; Adam H. DE HAVENON ; Sushrut DHARMADHIKARI ; Clifford J. ESKEY ; Mudassir FAROOQUI ; Steven K. FESKE ; Nitin GOYAL ; Kasey B. GRIMMETT ; Amy K. GUZIK ; Diogo C. HAUSSEN ; Majesta HOVINGH ; Dinesh JILLELA ; Peter T. KAN ; Rakesh KHATRI ; Naim N. KHOURY ; Nicole L. KILEY ; Murali K. KOLIKONDA ; Stephanie LARA ; Grace LI ; Italo LINFANTE ; Aaron I. LOOCHTAN ; Carlos D. LOPEZ ; Sarah LYCAN ; Shailesh S. MALE ; Fadi NAHAB ; Laith MAALI ; Hesham E. MASOUD ; Jiangyong MIN ; Santiago ORGETA-GUTIERREZ ; Ghada A. MOHAMED ; Mahmoud MOHAMMADEN ; Krishna NALLEBALLE ; Yazan RADAIDEH ; Pankajavalli RAMAKRISHNAN ; Bliss RAYO-TARANTO ; Diana M. ROJAS-SOTO ; Sean RULAND ; Alexis N. SIMPKINS ; Sunil A. SHETH ; Amy K. STAROSCIAK ; Nicholas E. TARLOV ; Robert A. TAYLOR ; Barbara VOETSCH ; Linda ZHANG ; Hai Quang DUONG ; Viet-Phuong DAO ; Huynh Vu LE ; Thong Nhu PHAM ; Mai Duy TON ; Anh Duc TRAN ; Osama O. ZAIDAT ; Paolo MACHI ; Elisabeth DIRREN ; Claudio RODRÍGUEZ FERNÁNDEZ ; Jorge ESCARTÍN LÓPEZ ; Jose Carlos FERNÁNDEZ FERRO ; Niloofar MOHAMMADZADEH ; Neil C. SURYADEVARA, MD ; Beatriz DE LA CRUZ FERNÁNDEZ ; Filipe BESSA ; Nina JANCAR ; Megan BRADY ; Dawn SCOZZARI
Journal of Stroke 2022;24(2):256-265
Background:
and Purpose Recent studies suggested an increased incidence of cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We evaluated the volume of CVT hospitalization and in-hospital mortality during the 1st year of the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the preceding year.
Methods:
We conducted a cross-sectional retrospective study of 171 stroke centers from 49 countries. We recorded COVID-19 admission volumes, CVT hospitalization, and CVT in-hospital mortality from January 1, 2019, to May 31, 2021. CVT diagnoses were identified by International Classification of Disease-10 (ICD-10) codes or stroke databases. We additionally sought to compare the same metrics in the first 5 months of 2021 compared to the corresponding months in 2019 and 2020 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04934020).
Results:
There were 2,313 CVT admissions across the 1-year pre-pandemic (2019) and pandemic year (2020); no differences in CVT volume or CVT mortality were observed. During the first 5 months of 2021, there was an increase in CVT volumes compared to 2019 (27.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24.2 to 32.0; P<0.0001) and 2020 (41.4%; 95% CI, 37.0 to 46.0; P<0.0001). A COVID-19 diagnosis was present in 7.6% (132/1,738) of CVT hospitalizations. CVT was present in 0.04% (103/292,080) of COVID-19 hospitalizations. During the first pandemic year, CVT mortality was higher in patients who were COVID positive compared to COVID negative patients (8/53 [15.0%] vs. 41/910 [4.5%], P=0.004). There was an increase in CVT mortality during the first 5 months of pandemic years 2020 and 2021 compared to the first 5 months of the pre-pandemic year 2019 (2019 vs. 2020: 2.26% vs. 4.74%, P=0.05; 2019 vs. 2021: 2.26% vs. 4.99%, P=0.03). In the first 5 months of 2021, there were 26 cases of vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT), resulting in six deaths.
Conclusions
During the 1st year of the COVID-19 pandemic, CVT hospitalization volume and CVT in-hospital mortality did not change compared to the prior year. COVID-19 diagnosis was associated with higher CVT in-hospital mortality. During the first 5 months of 2021, there was an increase in CVT hospitalization volume and increase in CVT-related mortality, partially attributable to VITT.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail