Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-56f9d74cfd-mgjtl Total loading time: 0.421 Render date: 2022-06-26T04:31:13.733Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

Reperfusion Therapy for Acute Stroke in Pregnant and Post-Partum Women: A Canadian Survey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2020

Christopher E. Uy
Affiliation:
Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
Stéphanie Gosselin-Lefebvre
Affiliation:
Service de Neurologie, Département de Médecine, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada
Adam M. Book
Affiliation:
Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada Vancouver Stroke Program and Djavad Mowafaghian Centre for Brain Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
Thalia S. Field*
Affiliation:
Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada Vancouver Stroke Program and Djavad Mowafaghian Centre for Brain Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
*
Correspondence to: Thalia S. Field, Associate Professor, University of British Columbia, S169-211 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BCV6T 2B5, Canada. Email: thalia.field@ubc.ca
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Background/objective:

A Canadian Stroke Best Practices consensus statement on Acute Stroke Management during pregnancy was published in 2018. The state of individual practice, however, is unknown.

Methods:

A survey on treatment of acute stroke in pregnant and post-partum women was distributed via the Canadian Stroke Consortium email list. Descriptive statistics (frequencies and proportions) were calculated for demographic and response variables and free-text responses were coded for thematic content.

Results:

Thirty-five participants completed the survey; 12 had experience with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IV-tPA), endovascular therapy (EVT), or both in pregnant patients. None had treatment-related complications. The majority (92%) of those who had not yet encountered the issue in practice expressed some reservation about giving IV-tPA to an otherwise eligible pregnant woman. In a theoretical scenario where an otherwise eligible pregnant woman was a candidate for both IV-tPA and EVT, 58% of respondents would have opted for EVT alone. Amongst this cohort comprised mainly of stroke sub-specialists, more than a third had treated pregnant patients with reperfusion therapy.

Conclusions:

The reported safety experience with both IV-tPA and EVT was reassuring. Overall, there was a hesitancy towards use of IV-tPA in pregnancy that is discordant with the recent consensus statement. Possible barriers to uptake identified through thematic analysis were concerns regarding risks of bleeding in the pregnant patient, presence of EVT as a perceived alternative, and the need for express consent from the patient and family.

Résumé :

RÉSUMÉ :

Offrir des traitements de reperfusion à des femmes enceintes ou qui viennent d’accoucher ayant été victimes d’un AVC aigu : un sondage canadien.

Contexte/objectif :

Une déclaration commune en lien avec les pratiques optimales de l’AVC au Canada et portant de façon plus particulière sur la prise en charge des AVC aigus durant la grossesse a été publiée en 2018. La pratique des médecins à ce sujet demeure toutefois encore méconnue.

Méthodes :

Un sondage portant sur le traitement des AVC aigus affectant des femmes enceintes ou des femmes qui viennent d’accoucher a ainsi été distribué par l’entremise de la liste de diffusion du Consortium neurovasculaire canadien (CNC). On a de la sorte pu obtenir des statistiques descriptives (fréquences et proportions) à propos des caractéristiques démographiques et des variables contenues dans les réponses ; de plus, les éléments de réponse élaborés plus librement ont été codés en vue d’extraire un contenu thématique.

Résultats :

Au total, 35 participants ont complété ce sondage. De ce nombre, 12 avaient de l’expérience avec l’activateur tissulaire du plasminogène (t-PA), la thérapie endovasculaire (TEV)) ou les deux dans le cas de patientes enceintes. Aucun d’entre eux n’a fait état de complications liées à ces traitements. La majorité de ceux n’ayant pas encore été confrontés à une telle situation clinique (92 %) dans leur pratique ont exprimé des réserves sur le fait de prodiguer un t-PA par intraveineuse à une femme enceinte par ailleurs admissible. Dans un scénario théorique en vertu duquel une femme enceinte admissible serait candidate aux deux traitements (t-PA et TEV), 58 % des répondants auraient opté pour la seule TEV. Parmi ce groupe de répondants composé principalement de sous-spécialistes des AVC, plus d’un tiers d’entre eux avaient traité des femmes enceintes au moyen de la thérapie de reperfusion.

Conclusions :

En matière de sécurité, l’expérience signalée par nos répondants, tant pour la T-PA que pour la TEV, s’est révélée rassurante. De façon générale, on a également noté une hésitation en ce qui regarde l’utilisation du t-PA par intraveineuse en cas de grossesse, ce qui constitue une contradiction par rapport à la récente déclaration commune évoquée ci-dessus. Notre analyse thématique nous a permis d’identifier de possibles obstacles à l’adoption de ce traitement : des préoccupations quant à des risques d’hémorragie chez des patientes enceintes ; la perception à l’effet que la TEV constitue une alternative ; et la nécessité d’obtenir le consentement explicite du patient et de sa famille.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences Inc.

Background/Objective

Ischemic stroke is a rare but serious complication of pregnancy, affecting approximately 12/100,000. Reference Swartz, Cayley and Foley1 Case fatality rate of pregnancy-associated ischemic stroke in a recent Canadian study was 7%. Reference Liu, Chan, Ray, Kramer and Joseph2

Although intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IV-tPA) and endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) are effective for treatment of acute ischemic stroke, Reference Emberson, Lees and Lyden3,Reference Goyal, Menon and van Zwam4 clinical trials examining these therapies, unsurprisingly, excluded pregnant women. There are no large, randomized studies investigating the safety or efficacy of these treatment options in pregnancy or in the post-partum period. The published experience with respect to acute stroke therapy in pregnant women is limited. In these published cases, IV-tPA was administered during all trimesters and, in general, most mothers made a good recovery and delivered healthy babies with incidence of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage being comparable to that in non-pregnant patients. Reference Sousa Gomes, Guimarães and Montenegro5,Reference Demchuk6 The published experience with endovascular therapy in pregnancy is also limited; most cases reported are in the third trimester of pregnancy and with good outcomes for both the mother and baby. Reference Limaye, Van de Walle Jones and Shaban7

The experience of treating acute ischemic stroke in pregnancy is not well documented, and preferred patterns of practice in Canada are not known. In 2018, recognizing a need for clinical guidance, the Canadian Stroke Best Practice and Quality Advisory Committee released a joint consensus statement for treating acute stroke in pregnancy. Reference Ladhani, Swartz and Foley8 We sought to describe real-life patterns of practice amongst stroke specialists with regards to IV-tPA and EVT in pregnant and post-partum patients.

Methods

The study was approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Board at the University of British Columbia. Participants were recruited through the Canadian Stroke Consortium (CSC) email list, which had 111 physician members involved in treatment of stroke, mostly neurologists. The survey consisted of seven main questions with branching sub-questions regarding past experience and theoretical treatment preferences with respect to reperfusion therapy for acute ischemic stroke in pregnant and post-partum women and demographic information. We defined the immediate post-partum period as <1 week and late post-partum period as ≥1 week. The survey was available to respondents in either English or French (see Supplement). Responses were de-identified. An unconditional $5 coffee gift card was offered to all participants. The survey remained open between October 2018 and April 2019, and one reminder email was sent 6 weeks after the initial invite.

Individual participant responses were exported from the survey’s web interface (Qualtrics University platform) into SPSS 26 (Armonk, NY) and analyzed using descriptive statistics, Chi-square, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests as applicable. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. No formal adjustments were made for multiple comparisons but results were interpreted in light of this context. Missing data was non-random and thus treated with pair-wise deletion. Free-text responses were examined manually and coded for thematic content using an inductive data-driven approach. Reference Braun and Clarke9 One author (TSF) coded the data with similar codes grouped to form sub-themes that were then reviewed for agreement by a second author (AB). Sub-themes were then integrated to identify main themes. Disagreements were resolved by consensus.

Results

Thirty-six of 111 (32%) physician members of the CSC mailing list participated with representation from most provinces. One respondent registered for the unconditional incentive but did not complete the survey; data from 35 participants are thus reported. One-third of respondents identified as female. The vast majority of respondents were stroke specialists and over half of respondents dedicated >75% of their clinical time to cerebrovascular disease. Career stages were evenly distributed (Table 1).

Table 1: Demographic characteristics of respondents (n = 35)

Ten participants (29%) had given IV-tPA to a pregnant woman at least once; two had experience with two cases. Most instances were in the third trimester. Two additional participants had cases where the patient was otherwise IV-tPA-eligible but thrombolysis was not administered because the patient would not give informed consent (n = 1) or because the respondent had not felt comfortable administering IV-tPA to a pregnant patient (n = 1) (Table 2). Of those who had experience with tPA in pregnancy, none reported any treatment-associated complications. There were no associations or trends with respect to respondent demographics (gender, years in practice, practice time dedicated to stroke) and experience with administration of IV-tPA in pregnancy.

Table 2: Treatment experience and preferences regarding reperfusion therapy in pregnant patients

1 First trimester (n = 2); second (1), third (5); responders with two patients (n = 2): second and third (1), can’t recall (1).

2 First trimester (n = 2), second (2), third (6).

3 Two non-respondents for the question.

Respondents who had never encountered the scenario were asked if they would proceed with IV thrombolysis in the case of an otherwise IV-tPA-eligible pregnant patient. Only two respondents (8%) answered with an unqualified “yes, always”; one with “no,” and the remaining 22 (88%) with qualifications (“yes, in some instances”) (Table 2). Themes arising in the qualifications discussed by respondents included (a) stroke severity, (b) risks of treatment and/or risk-benefit calculus, (c) alternative therapies, (d) collaborative care with obstetrics, and (d) considerations around the consent process (Table 3).

Table 3: Thematic analysis and examples of responses qualifying “yes, in some situations” responses

Ten participants (29%) had experience with EVT in pregnancy, mostly during the third trimester. Of those, seven had also given IV-tPA to pregnant patients, though there was no mechanism to clarify if both treatments were administered to the same patient. Two respondents had experience with EVT but not tPA. There were no instances where an EVT-eligible patient did not proceed with therapy due to issues with consent or physician comfort. None experienced EVT-related complications, although one respondent’s patient required an emergency induction following EVT due to atypical HELLP syndrome as well as concerns requiring the need for possible hemicraniectomy (Table 2). There were no associations between respondent demographics and experience with EVT in pregnancy.

Respondents who had never encountered the scenario were asked if they would proceed with endovascular therapy in the case of an otherwise EVT-eligible pregnant patient. Nineteen (76%) respondents gave an unqualified “yes, always” with the remaining six answering “yes, in some instances” (Table 2). EVT-related considerations primarily focused on stroke severity and risk-benefit calculus, with a lesser focus on the consent process (Table 3).

All respondents were asked as to how they would proceed in the theoretical case of an otherwise IV-tPA- and EVT-eligible pregnant patient, where both therapies were readily available. Fourteen (40%) responded that they would proceed with both IV-tPA and EVT and 19 (54%) with EVT only, with 2 non-responses. Three of those who responded with “EVT-only” had experience giving IV-tPA in pregnancy. There was no association between treatment preference and respondents’ demographic characteristics.

Two respondents had experience giving IV-tPA to women in the early post-partum period. One case was complicated by major hemorrhage requiring transfusion or surgical intervention. Seven respondents (20%) had given IV-tPA to women in the later post-partum period (ranging from 2 weeks to 3 months), none of whom had any complications (Supplementary Table S1). Those who had not experienced these scenarios for the most part expressed hesitancy in giving IV-tPA in the early post-partum period. Considerations focused mainly on bleeding risks and in particular as they related to delivery method. Collaborative care with obstetrics was emphasized, with several participants focusing on urgent physical availability of the obstetrics–gynecology team (Table 3). More participants were amenable to administration of IV-tPA in the later post-partum period though the reported considerations were similar.

Discussion

Amongst respondents, experience with reperfusion therapy in pregnancy was not uncommon. Over one-third (12/35) of respondents had experienced cases involving use of IV-tPA, EVT or both in pregnant patients. Reassuringly, no respondents reported any complications related to either therapy. Experience with thrombolysis in the early post-partum period was uncommon, with one of two cases experiencing a hemorrhage requiring treatment. Most respondents who had not yet encountered such a scenario in practice showed an overall willingness to recommend EVT for eligible cases in pregnancy, but a large proportion expressed hesitancy towards using IV-tPA in pregnancy, particularly in a situation where the patient was also EVT eligible.

The Canadian Best Practice Consensus statement on acute stroke management in pregnancy recommends prioritizing maternal health in clinical decision-making. It also recommends employing, whenever possible, the same clinical decision-making process that one would make for a non-pregnant patient. Reference Ladhani, Swartz and Foley8 In the context of limited literature regarding safety of IV-tPA and EVT in pregnancy, the fact that no complications with either treatment are reported here should provide additional reassurance of safety for reperfusion therapies in properly selected pregnant patients. It should be noted, however, that our respondents for the most part represent a specialized subset of stroke specialists at comprehensive stroke centers.

It is unclear whether the apparent hesitancy to use IV-tPA in pregnancy reflects clinician risk aversion specific to pregnant patients. The recurrent themes in respondent comments suggest this is the case given frequent mention of the need for shared decision-making with obstetrics and express consent from the patient and family. Alternatively, the lack of clinician enthusiasm for IV-tPA may be more indicative of equipoise regarding use of IV thrombolysis in EVT-eligible patients in general. Reference Fischer, Kaesmacher and Mendes Pereira10 The latter question continues to be explored in ongoing clinical trials. At present, the available evidence does not suggest the benefit of withholding IV thrombolysis in otherwise eligible patients. Reference Vidale, Romoli, Consoli and Agostoni11 Interestingly, respondents were hesitant but few were opposed to recommending IV-tPA in the early post-partum period, where the reported experience suggests that risk of hemorrhage may be high. In a case series of 13 patients administered IV thrombolysis for pulmonary embolism (n = 12) and acute stroke (n = 1) in the very early post-partum period (<48 h post-partum), blood transfusions were required in all but one case. Reference Akazawa and Nishida12

Our study is limited by a response rate of one in three, though this rate is consistent with what is reported from other physician web-based surveys. Reference VanGeest, Johnson and Welch13 In addition to responder biases, our findings may also be subject to recall or reporting bias from participants. Finally, in the time since our survey was conducted, uptake of recommendations from the consensus statement may have improved.

Conclusion

In this cohort consisting mainly of stroke neurologists practicing at comprehensive stroke centers, more than a third had experience in treating acute stroke in pregnancy with tPA and/or EVT. No treatment-related complications were reported. Even in this sub-specialized group of respondents and despite consensus guidelines recommending use of thrombolysis in otherwise eligible pregnant patients, respondents were hesitant to unconditionally recommend IV-tPA, particularly when EVT was concurrently indicated and available. Future knowledge dissemination activities related to treatment of stroke in pregnancy should take into account neurologists’ concerns regarding pregnancy-specific risks of thrombolysis and a bias towards using EVT alone as a treatment strategy.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Karen Earl and the Canadian Stroke Consortium for facilitating survey participation.

Disclosures

TSF is supported by the Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research and the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada. TSF has received in-kind study medication from Bayer Canada and an honorarium from Servier for speaker’s bureau activities. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

Statement of Authorship

CEU – Collected and analyzed data, drafted the manuscript; SGL – Translated the survey, analyzed data and critically revised the manuscript; AMB – analyzed data, critically revised the manuscript; TSF – conceived of the project, designed the survey, analyzed data and critically revised manuscript;

Supplementary Material

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit https://doi.org/10.1017/cjn.2020.207.

References

Swartz, RH, Cayley, ML, Foley, N, et al. The incidence of pregnancy-related stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Stroke 2017;12:687–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, S, Chan, W-S, Ray, JG, Kramer, MS, Joseph, KS, and for the Canadian Perinatal Surveillance System (Public Health Agency of Canada). Stroke and cerebrovascular disease in pregnancy: incidence, temporal trends, and risk factors. Stroke 2019;50:1320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emberson, J, Lees, KR, Lyden, P, et al. Effect of treatment delay, age, and stroke severity on the effects of intravenous thrombolysis with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. The Lancet. 2014;384:1929–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goyal, M, Menon, BK, van Zwam, WH, et al. HERMES collaborators. Endovascular thrombectomy after large-vessel ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from five randomised trials. Lancet 2016;387:1723–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sousa Gomes, M, Guimarães, M, Montenegro, N. Thrombolysis in pregnancy: a literature review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2019;32:2418–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Demchuk, AM. Yes, intravenous thrombolysis should be administered in pregnancy when other clinical and imaging factors are favorable. Stroke 2013;44:864–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Limaye, K, Van de Walle Jones, A, Shaban, A, et al. Endovascular management of acute large vessel occlusion stroke in pregnancy is safe and feasible. J Neurointerv Surg 2020;12:552–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ladhani, NNN, Swartz, RH, Foley, N, et al. Canadian stroke best practice consensus statement: acute stroke management during pregnancy. Int J Stroke 2018;13:743–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Braun, V, Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006;3:77101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, U, Kaesmacher, J, Mendes Pereira, V, et al. Direct mechanical thrombectomy versus combined intravenous and mechanical thrombectomy in large-artery anterior circulation stroke: a topical review. Stroke 2017;48:2912–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Vidale, S, Romoli, M, Consoli, D, Agostoni, EC. Bridging versus direct mechanical thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke: a subgroup pooled meta-analysis for time of intervention, eligibility, and study design. Cerebrovasc Dis 2020;49:223–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Akazawa, M, Nishida, M. Thrombolysis with intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator during early postpartum period: a review of the literature. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2017;96:529–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
VanGeest, JB, Johnson, TP, Welch, VL. Methodologies for improving response rates in surveys of physicians: a systematic review. Eval Health Prof 2007;30:303–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1: Demographic characteristics of respondents (n = 35)

Figure 1

Table 2: Treatment experience and preferences regarding reperfusion therapy in pregnant patients

Figure 2

Table 3: Thematic analysis and examples of responses qualifying “yes, in some situations” responses

Supplementary material: PDF

Uy et al. supplementary material

Uy et al. supplementary material

Download Uy et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 2 MB
You have Access
4
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Reperfusion Therapy for Acute Stroke in Pregnant and Post-Partum Women: A Canadian Survey
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Reperfusion Therapy for Acute Stroke in Pregnant and Post-Partum Women: A Canadian Survey
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Reperfusion Therapy for Acute Stroke in Pregnant and Post-Partum Women: A Canadian Survey
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *