Numerous studies have shown longer pre-hospital and in-hospital workflow times and poorer outcomes in women after acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in general and after endovascular treatment (EVT) in particular. We investigated sex differences in acute stroke care of EVT patients over 5 years in a comprehensive Canadian provincial registry.

Clinical data of all AIS patients who underwent EVT between January 2017 and December 2022 in the province of Saskatchewan were captured in the Canadian OPTIMISE registry and supplemented with patient data from administrative data sources. Patient baseline characteristics, transport time metrics, and technical EVT outcomes between female and male EVT patients were compared.

Three-hundred-three patients underwent EVT between 2017 and 2022: 144 (47.5%) women and 159 (52.5%) men. Women were significantly older (median age 77.5 [interquartile range: 66–85] vs.71 [59–78], p < 0.001), while men had more intracranial internal carotid artery occlusions (48/159 [30.2%] vs. 26/142 [18.3%], p = 0.03). Last-known-well to comprehensive stroke center (CSC)-arrival time (median 232 min [interquartile range 90–432] in women vs. 230 min [90–352] in men), CSC-arrival-to-reperfusion time (median 108 min [88–149] in women vs. 102 min [77–141] in men), reperfusion status (successful reperfusion 106/142 [74.7%] in women vs. 117/158 [74.1%] in men) as well as modified Rankin score at 90 days did not differ significantly. This held true after adjusting for baseline variables in multivariable analyses.

While women undergoing EVT in the province of Saskatchewan were on average older than men, they were treated just as fast and achieved similar technical and clinical outcomes compared to men.

Whereas the beneficial effect of antiplatelet therapy for recurrent stroke prevention has been well established, uncertainties remain regarding the optimal antithrombotic regimen for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis. We sought to explore the approaches of stroke physicians to antithrombotic management of patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis.

We employed a qualitative descriptive methodology to explore the decision-making approaches and opinions of physicians regarding antithrombotic regimens for symptomatic carotid stenosis. We conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 22 stroke physicians (11 neurologists, 3 geriatricians, 5 interventional-neuroradiologists, and 3 neurosurgeons) from 16 centers on four continents to discuss symptomatic carotid stenosis management. We then conducted thematic analysis on the transcripts.

Important themes revealed from our analysis included limitations of existing clinical trial evidence, competing surgeon versus neurologist/internist preferences, and the choice of antiplatelet therapy while awaiting revascularization. There was a greater concern for adverse events while using multiple antiplatelet agents (e.g., dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT)) in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy compared to carotid artery stenting. Regional variations included more frequent use of single antiplatelet agents among European participants. Areas of uncertainty included antithrombotic management if already on an antiplatelet agent, implications of nonstenotic features of carotid disease, the role of newer antiplatelet agents or anticoagulants, platelet aggregation testing, and timing of DAPT.

Our qualitative findings can help physicians critically examine the rationale underlying their own antithrombotic approaches to symptomatic carotid stenosis. Future clinical trials may wish to accommodate identified variations in practice patterns and areas of uncertainty to better inform clinical practice.

Although age-standardized stroke occurrence has been decreasing, the absolute number of stroke events globally, and in Canada, is increasing. Stroke surveillance is necessary for health services planning, informing research design, and public health messaging. We used administrative data to estimate the number of stroke events resulting in hospital or emergency department presentation across Canada in the 2017–18 fiscal year.

Hospitalization data were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) Discharge Abstract Database and the Ministry of Health and Social Services in Quebec. Emergency department data were obtained from the CIHI National Ambulatory Care Reporting System (Alberta and Ontario). Stroke events were identified using ICD-10 coding. Data were linked into episodes of care to account for readmissions and interfacility transfers. Projections for emergency department visits for provinces/territories outside of Alberta and Ontario were generated based upon age and sex-standardized estimates from Alberta and Ontario.

In the 2017–18 fiscal year, there were 108,707 stroke events resulting in hospital or emergency department presentation across the country. This was made up of 54,357 events resulting in hospital admission and 54,350 events resulting in only emergency department presentation. The events resulting in only emergency department presentation consisted of 25,941 events observed in Alberta and Ontario and a projection of 28,409 events across the rest of the country.

We estimate a stroke event resulting in hospital or emergency department presentation occurs every 5 minutes in Canada.

Despite the high proportion of stroke patients with a pre-existing impairment, patients with disabilities are often excluded from stroke treatment trials. Trials are designed for “perfect patients”: patients who are functionally independent and thus generally younger with fewer comorbidities; ironically, such patients are less likely to experience stroke than those with premorbid disability. Exclusionary practices in trials may translate into disparities in stroke care in practice. Through a review of literature, our purpose is to illuminate how people with disabilities are treated across the care continuum following a stroke.

We completed a qualitative systematized review of articles pertaining to the care of patients with premorbid disability and stroke and their outcomes. Using a critical disability studies' theoretical lens, we analyzed inequity across the stroke care continuum.

Among 24 included studies, we found evidence that people with disabilities did not receive equitable access to treatment ranging from being admitted to stroke units to receiving post-stroke rehabilitation. However, observational studies suggest that stroke therapies may be beneficial in selected patients with disabilities when measures of success are framed more achievable (e.g. return to pre-stroke status). This leaves us concerned about how people with pre-existing impairments might be structurally disabled within current systems of stroke care.

We use our critical disability studies' theoretical lens to argue that an intersectional approach to stroke treatment is much needed if we are to remedy structural inequities embedded throughout the care continuum.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been associated with various neurological and atypical head/eyes/ears/nose/throat (HEENT) manifestations. We sought to review the evidence for these manifestations.

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we compiled studies published until March 31, 2021 that examined non-respiratory HEENT, central, and peripheral nervous system presentations in COVID-19 patients. We included 477 studies for qualitative synthesis and 59 studies for meta-analyses.

Anosmia, ageusia, and conjunctivitis may precede typical upper/lower respiratory symptoms. Central nervous system (CNS) manifestations include stroke and encephalopathy, potentially with brainstem or cranial nerve involvement. MRI studies support CNS para-/postinfectious etiologies, but direct neuroinvasion seems very rare, with few cases detecting Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the CNS. Peripheral nervous system (PNS) manifestations include muscle damage, Guillain–Barre syndrome (GBS), and its variants. There was moderate-to-high study heterogeneity and risk of bias. In random-effects meta-analyses, anosmia/ageusia was estimated to occur in 56% of COVID-19 patients (95% CI: 0.41–0.71, I2:99.9%), more commonly than in patients without COVID-19 (OR: 14.28, 95% CI: 8.39–24.29, I2: 49.0%). Neurological symptoms were estimated to occur in 36% of hospitalized patients (95% CI: 0.31–0.42, I2: 99.8%); ischemic stroke in 3% (95% CI: 0.03–0.04, I2: 99.2%), and GBS in 0.04% (0.033%–0.047%), more commonly than in patients without COVID-19 (OR[stroke]: 2.53, 95% CI: 1.16–5.50, I2: 76.4%; OR[GBS]: 3.43,1.15–10.25, I2: 89.1%).

Current evidence is mostly from retrospective cohorts or series, largely in hospitalized or critically ill patients, not representative of typical community-dwelling patients. There remains a paucity of systematically gathered prospective data on neurological manifestations. Nevertheless, these findings support a high index of suspicion to identify HEENT/neurological presentations in patients with known COVID-19, and to test for COVID-19 in patients with such presentations at risk of infection.

Decisions to treat large-vessel occlusion with endovascular therapy (EVT) or intravenous alteplase depend on how physicians weigh benefits against risks when considering patients’ comorbidities. We explored EVT/alteplase decision-making by stroke experts in the setting of comorbidity/disability.

In an international multi-disciplinary survey, experts chose treatment approaches under current resources and under assumed ideal conditions for 10 of 22 randomly assigned case scenarios. Five included comorbidities (cancer, cardiac/respiratory/renal disease, mild cognitive impairment [MCI], physical dependence). We examined scenario/respondent characteristics associated with EVT/alteplase decisions using multivariable logistic regressions.

Among 607 physicians (38 countries), EVT was chosen less often in comorbidity-related scenarios (79.6% under current resources, 82.7% assuming ideal conditions) versus six “level-1A” scenarios for which EVT/alteplase was clearly indicated by current guidelines (91.1% and 95.1%, respectively, odds ratio [OR] [current resources]: 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.31–0.47). However, EVT was chosen more often in comorbidity-related scenarios compared to all other 17 scenarios (79.6% versus 74.4% under current resources, OR: 1.34, 1.17–1.54). Responses favoring alteplase for comorbidity-related scenarios (e.g. 75.0% under current resources) were comparable to level-1A scenarios (72.2%) and higher than all others (60.4%). No comorbidity independently diminished EVT odds when considering all scenarios. MCI and dependence carried higher alteplase odds; cancer and cardiac/respiratory/renal disease had lower odds. Being older/female carried lower EVT odds. Relevant respondent characteristics included performing more EVT cases/year (higher EVT-, lower alteplase odds), practicing in East Asia (higher EVT odds), and in interventional neuroradiology (lower alteplase odds vs neurology).

Moderate-to-severe comorbidities did not consistently deter experts from EVT, suggesting equipoise about withholding EVT based on comorbidities. However, alteplase was often foregone when respondents chose EVT. Differences in decision-making by patient age/sex merit further study.