Inclusion criteria for this study were a diagnosis of AIS and preceding OAC prescription at the time point of symptom onset (either DOAC or VKA). We selected a random sample of patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria from our prospectively consecutive local stroke registry from February 2015 to August 2017. We chose random sampling because of lack of capacity to analyze the images of all DOAC and VKA patients of the registry. For this purpose, a random number between 0 and 1 was generated using the excel function =RAND for each patient. By sorting the random number ascendingly, the first 80 patients were included in the study. We analyzed only patients with MRI on admission, which represents the preferred imaging modality in our center (about 60-70%). We excluded patients with transient ischemic attacks, stroke mimics, non-cerebral ischemic events, refusal of further use of biological data and missing information on OAC medication from this analysis. Antiplatelet prescription did not affect group assignment. For the sensitivity analysis, we further defined confirmed therapeutic OAC as specific drug activity >50ng/ml in patients taking DOAC (12–16) and INR >1.7 in VKA patients. If no specific drug activity was available in patients taking DOAC, confirmed therapeutic OAC was defined as reported previously (17).
We assessed the following information from the registry and in case of missing items in the medical records: demographic variables (age, sex, prestroke modified Rankin Scale (mRS)), cardiovascular risk factors, clinical parameters (blood pressure, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), onset type, TOAST-etiology, antithrombotic, antihypertensive and lipid lowering medication before admission, laboratory parameters (cholesterol, glucose, creatinine, and international normalized ratio INR) and acute recanalization treatment such as intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and endovascular therapy (EVT).
Imaging Protocol:
We acquired MRI scans on the day of admission, either on a 1.5T scanner (Siemens Magnetom Avanto and Siemens Magnetom Aera, Siemens Medical Solutions, Erlangen, Germany) or a 3T system (Siemens Magnetom Verio, Siemens Medical Solutions, Erlangen, Germany). Our MRI protocol includes axial diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) (5 mm slice thickness), Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) (5 mm slice thickness), susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) (1.6 mm slice thickness), and a time of flight (TOF) angiography (0.5 mm slice thickness). After application of intravenous Gadobutrol (Gadovist; Bayer Schering Pharma, Berlin, Germany) in an antecubital vein with a 5 ml/s injection rate, we acquired a standard dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI perfusion (Tmax, 5 mm slice thickness) as well as a contrast enhanced T1-weighted sequence (slice thickness 5mm). Finally, a contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE MRA) of the head and neck vessels was acquired after injection of a second bolus of Gadobutrol with a 3 ml/s injection rate. Post-processing of DSC was performed using Olea sphere v.2.3 (Olea Medical, La Ciotat, France), using deconvolution method with oscillant singular value decomposition. Follow-up imaging was performed using the same scanners and same MRI protocol.
Outcomes and Imaging analysis:
Two raters (EA and SF) assessed the imaging outcomes after a standardized training and blinded to patients’ OAC status. All ratings were controlled by a board-certified neuroradiologist (AH) with more than ten years experience in stroke imaging. The primary outcome was the presence of any LVO defined as occlusion of an artery supplying the brain visible on TOF or contrast enhanced MR-angiography. Secondary outcomes included: target LVO for EVT defined as LVO until or proximal to A1/M2-segment of the anterior circulation or P1-segment of the posterior circulation; presence and length of thrombus as determined by SWI; size of hypoperfusion; degree of DWI infarction core and hypoperfused area mismatch defined as small mismatch (infarction core ≥ 2/3 of the hypoperfused region), moderate mismatch (infarction core > 1/3 and <2/3 of the hypoperfused region) and large mismatch (infarction core ≤ 1/3 of the hypoperfused region) by visual judgment; maximal diameter in mm of the acute ischemic lesion as determined in DWI (axis 1), maximal diameter of a perpendicular axis of the acute ischemic lesion (axis 2). In case of multiple lesions, the largest lesion was analyzed for the primary analysis. Other outcomes included size of ischemia demarcation in FLAIR sequence at 24 hours; presence of cerebral microbleeds (CMB) according to established criteria at baseline (18); presence of hemorrhagic transformation at 24 hours according to the Heidelberg classification (19); presence of more than one (multiple) acute ischemic lesions and severity of white matter hyperintensities according to the Fazekas score (20).
Statistics:
We compared the two OAC groups (DOAC versus VKA), and patients with confirmed and infra-therapeutic OAC using appropriate statistical measures (Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables, Mann-Whitney-U-Test for non-normally continuous or ordinally scaled variables, and Welch’s t-test for independent normally distributed data). We determined published predictors of stroke severity as pre-specified covariates and factors for the multivariate analysis avoiding collinearity. For the primary analysis, the association of OAC type (DOAC versus VKA) with any LVO or target LVO for EVT was assessed using binary logistic regression adjusting for the following confounders: age (continuous), sex (categorical), admission glucose (linear, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) per mmol/L increase), arterial hypertension (categorical) and atrial fibrillation (categorical). For the secondary analysis, the same confounders were included in a multivariable linear regression analysis. Patients with missing data items were excluded from the multivariate analysis. For the sensitivity analysis, the same model was used considering only patients with confirmed therapeutic OAC activity on admission. We used a level of significance of 0.05.