Literature DB >> 33765420

Aspirin versus anticoagulation in cervical artery dissection (TREAT-CAD): an open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

Stefan T Engelter1, Christopher Traenka2, Henrik Gensicke2, Sabine A Schaedelin3, Andreas R Luft4, Barbara Goeggel Simonetti5, Urs Fischer6, Patrik Michel7, Gaia Sirimarco7, Georg Kägi8, Jochen Vehoff8, Krassen Nedeltchev9, Timo Kahles9, Lars Kellert10, Sverre Rosenbaum11, Regina von Rennenberg12, Roman Sztajzel13, Stephen L Leib14, Simon Jung6, Jan Gralla15, Nicole Bruni3, David Seiffge16, Katharina Feil17, Alexandros A Polymeris18, Levke Steiner19, Janne Hamann19, Leo H Bonati18, Alex Brehm20, Gian Marco De Marchis16, Nils Peters2, Christoph Stippich21, Christian H Nolte12, Hanne Christensen11, Susanne Wegener19, Marios-Nikos Psychogios20, Marcel Arnold6, Philippe Lyrer18.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cervical artery dissection is a major cause of stroke in young people (aged <50 years). Historically, clinicians have preferred using oral anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists for patients with cervical artery dissection, although some current guidelines-based on available evidence from mostly observational studies-suggest using aspirin. If proven to be non-inferior to vitamin K antagonists, aspirin might be preferable, due to its ease of use and lower cost. We aimed to test the non-inferiority of aspirin to vitamin K antagonists in patients with cervical artery dissection.
METHODS: We did a multicentre, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial in ten stroke centres across Switzerland, Germany, and Denmark. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients aged older than 18 years who had symptomatic, MRI-verified, cervical artery dissection within 2 weeks before enrolment, to receive either aspirin 300 mg once daily or a vitamin K antagonist (phenprocoumon, acenocoumarol, or warfarin; target international normalised ratio [INR] 2·0-3·0) for 90 days. Randomisation was computer-generated using an interactive web response system, with stratification according to participating site. Independent imaging core laboratory adjudicators were masked to treatment allocation, but investigators, patients, and clinical event adjudicators were aware of treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was a composite of clinical outcomes (stroke, major haemorrhage, or death) and MRI outcomes (new ischaemic or haemorrhagic brain lesions) in the per-protocol population, assessed at 14 days (clinical and MRI outcomes) and 90 days (clinical outcomes only) after commencing treatment. Non-inferiority of aspirin would be shown if the upper limit of the two-sided 95% CI of the absolute risk difference between groups was less than 12% (non-inferiority margin). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02046460.
FINDINGS: Between Sept 11, 2013, and Dec 21, 2018, we enrolled 194 patients; 100 (52%) were assigned to the aspirin group and 94 (48%) were assigned to the vitamin K antagonist group. The per-protocol population included 173 patients; 91 (53%) in the aspirin group and 82 (47%) in the vitamin K antagonist group. The primary endpoint occurred in 21 (23%) of 91 patients in the aspirin group and in 12 (15%) of 82 patients in the vitamin K antagonist group (absolute difference 8% [95% CI -4 to 21], non-inferiority p=0·55). Thus, non-inferiority of aspirin was not shown. Seven patients (8%) in the aspirin group and none in the vitamin K antagonist group had ischaemic strokes. One patient (1%) in the vitamin K antagonist group and none in the aspirin group had major extracranial haemorrhage. There were no deaths. Subclinical MRI outcomes were recorded in 14 patients (15%) in the aspirin group and in 11 patients (13%) in the vitamin K antagonist group. There were 19 adverse events in the aspirin group, and 26 in the vitamin K antagonist group.
INTERPRETATION: Our findings did not show that aspirin was non-inferior to vitamin K antagonists in the treatment of cervical artery dissection. FUNDING: Swiss National Science Foundation, Swiss Heart Foundation, Stroke Funds Basel, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Academic Society Basel.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33765420     DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(21)00044-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Neurol        ISSN: 1474-4422            Impact factor:   44.182


  11 in total

1.  ESO guideline for the management of extracranial and intracranial artery dissection.

Authors:  Stephanie Debette; Mikael Mazighi; Philippe Bijlenga; Alessandro Pezzini; Masatoshi Koga; Anna Bersano; Janika Kõrv; Julien Haemmerli; Isabella Canavero; Piotr Tekiela; Kaori Miwa; David J Seiffge; Sabrina Schilling; Avtar Lal; Marcel Arnold; Hugh S Markus; Stefan T Engelter; Jennifer J Majersik
Journal:  Eur Stroke J       Date:  2021-10-13

Review 2.  Antiplatelets or anticoagulants? Secondary prevention in cervical artery dissection: an updated meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ei Zune The; Ne Naing Lin; Ching Jocelyn Chan; Jason Cher Wei Loon; Benjamin Yong-Qiang Tan; Chee Seong Raymond Seet; Hock Luen Teoh; Joy Vijayan; Leong Litt Leonard Yeo
Journal:  Neurol Res Pract       Date:  2022-06-13

3.  Clinical and radiological features of medullary infarction caused by spontaneous vertebral artery dissection.

Authors:  Weijun Tang; Xiang Han; Chun Yu; Zhu Zhu; Siying Li; Yi Xu; Wei Yan; Xiaocui Kang; Yao Li; Qiang Dong
Journal:  Stroke Vasc Neurol       Date:  2022-03-03

Review 4.  Oral Anticoagulant and Antiplatelet Therapy for Cervical Artery Dissection: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Sheng-Lin Ye; Chuang Wang; Lu-Lu Wang; Tian-Ze Xu; Xiao-Qiang Li; Tao Tang
Journal:  Clin Appl Thromb Hemost       Date:  2021 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 2.389

5.  Antiplatelet vs. Anticoagulation in Cervical Artery Dissection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Sihua Liu; Xiao Zhang; Xuesong Bai; Yutong Yang; Tao Wang; Xin Xu; Ran Xu; Long Li; Yao Feng; Kun Yang; Xue Wang; Xiaofan Guo; Jing Chen; Yan Ma; Liqun Jiao
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2021-11-24       Impact factor: 4.003

6.  Carotid artery dissection in Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria: a case report.

Authors:  Víctor González-Maestro; Einés Monteagudo-Vilavedra; Jorge Rodríguez-Antuña; Marta Lendoiro-Fuentes; María Soledad Brage Gómez; Elena Maside Miño
Journal:  BMC Pediatr       Date:  2022-03-14       Impact factor: 2.125

7.  Spontaneous Dissections of Bilateral Internal Carotid and Vertebral Arteries due to Intractable Vomiting.

Authors:  Gift Echefu; Rameela Mahat; Raju Vatsavai; Steven Zuckerman
Journal:  Case Rep Vasc Med       Date:  2022-04-11

8.  Atorvastatin for unruptured intracranial vertebrobasilar dissecting aneurysm (ATREAT-VBD): protocol for a randomised, double-blind, blank-controlled trial.

Authors:  Mirzat Turhon; Huibin Kang; Jiliang Huang; Mengxing Li; Jian Liu; Ying Zhang; Kun Wang; Xinjian Yang; Yisen Zhang
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 3.006

Review 9.  Cervical Artery Dissections: Etiopathogenesis and Management.

Authors:  Zafer Keser; Chia-Chun Chiang; John C Benson; Alessandro Pezzini; Giuseppe Lanzino
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2022-09-02

10.  Ischemic Stroke Due to Spontaneous Dissection of the Brachiocephalic to the Common Carotid Artery with a Fatal Course after Expansion to the Ascending Aorta.

Authors:  Kazumasa Oura; Mitsunobu Sato; Mao Yamaguchi Oura; Ryo Itabashi; Tetsuya Maeda
Journal:  Intern Med       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 1.282

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.