Dr Stephen Read

Description:Objective: This tertiary analysis from A Very Early Rehabilitation Trial (AVERT) examined fatal and nonfatal serious adverse events (SAEs) at 14 days. Methods: AVERT was a prospective, parallel group, assessor blinded, randomized international clinical trial comparing mobility training commenced <24 hours poststroke, termed very early mobilization (VEM), to usual care (UC). Primary outcome was assessed at 3 months. Patients with ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke within 24 hours of onset were included. Treatment with thrombolytics was allowed. Patients with severe premorbid disability or comorbidities were excluded. Interventions continued for 14 days or hospital discharge if less. The primary early safety outcome was fatal SAEs within 14 days. Secondary outcomes were nonfatal SAEs classified as neurologic, immobility-related, and other. Mortality influences were assessed using binary logistic regression adjusted for baseline stroke severity (NIH Stroke Scale [NIHSS] score) and age. Results: A total of 2,104 participants were randomized to VEM (n = 1,054) or UC (n = 1,050) with a median age of 72 years (interquartile range [IQR] 63-80) and NIHSS 7 (IQR 4-12). By 14 days, 48 had died in VEM, 32 in UC, age and stroke severity adjusted odds ratio of 1.76 (95% confidence interval 1.06-2.92, p = 0.029). Stroke progression was more common in VEM. Exploratory subgroup analyses showed higher odds of death in intracerebral hemorrhage and >80 years subgroups, but there was no significant treatment by subgroup interaction. No difference in nonfatal SAEs was found. Conclusions: While the overall case fatality at 14 days poststroke was only 3.8%, mortality adjusted for age and stroke severity was increased with high dose and intensive training compared to usual care. Stroke progression was more common in VEM. Background: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12606000185561. Methods: This study provides Class I evidence that very early mobilization increases mortality at 14 days poststroke.

Description:Cognitive impairment is a common consequence of stroke, but remains difficult to predict. We investigate the ability of early QEEG assessment to inform such prediction, using binary logistic regression. Thirty-five patients (12 female, ages 18-87) suffering middle cerebral artery, ischemic stroke were studied. Resting-state EEG was recorded 48-239 h after symptom onset. Relative power for delta, theta, alpha, and beta bands, delta:alpha ratio, and peak alpha frequency were analyzed. Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was administered, where possible, on day of EEG and at median 99 days (range 69-138) poststroke. Eight patients could not complete the baseline MoCA, and four the follow-up MoCA, for varying reasons (most commonly, stroke symptoms). Fifteen patients (48%) had cognitive impairment (MoCA score ≤25) at follow-up. One QEEG index was able to correctly predict presence/absence of cognitive impairment in 24/31 patients (77.4%), whereas predischarge MoCA did so in 23 patients. This index, relative theta frequency (4-7.5 Hz) power, was computed from only three posterior electrodes over the stroke-affected hemisphere. Its predictive accuracy (three electrodes) was higher than that of any "global" QEEG measure (averaged over 19 electrodes). These results may signify association between poststroke alpha slowing and cognitive impairment, which may be mediated by attentional (dys)function, which warrants further investigation. Pending further studies, QEEG measure(s)-from a few electrodes-could inform early prognostication of poststroke cognitive outcomes (and clinical decisions), particularly when cognitive function cannot be adequately assessed (due to symptoms, language, or other issues) or when assessment is equivocal.

Description:Objective: Quantitative electroencephalographic (QEEG) indices sensitive to abnormal slow (relative to faster) activity power seem uniquely informative for clinical management of ischaemic stroke (IS), including around acute reperfusion therapies. However these have not been compared between IS and control samples. The primary objective was to identify the QEEG slowing index and threshold value which can most accurately discriminate between IS patients and controls. Methods: The samples comprised 28 controls (mean age: 70.4; range: 56-84) and 18 patients (mean age: 69.3; range: 51-86). Seven indices were analysed: relative bandpower (delta, theta, alpha, beta), delta/alpha power ratio (DAR), (delta+theta)/(alpha+beta) ratio (DTABR) and QSLOWING. The accuracies of each index for classifying participants (IS or control) were analysed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) techniques. Results: All indices differed significantly between the samples (p<.001). DAR alone exhibited optimal classifier accuracy, with a threshold of 3.7 demonstrating 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity for discriminating between radiologically-confirmed, acute IS or control. DTABR and relative delta were the next most accurate classifiers. Conclusions: DAR of 3.7 demonstrated maximal accuracy for classifying all 46 participants as acute IS or control. Conclusions: DAR assessment may inform clinical management of IS and perhaps other neurocritical patients.