Thomas G Brott

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Нью-Брансуик, New Jersey, United States

Are you Thomas G Brott?

Claim your profile

Publications (307)2389.03 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and purpose: Prior meta-analysis showed that carotid endarterectomy benefits decline with increasing surgical delay following symptoms. For symptomatic patients in the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial (CREST), we assessed if differences in time between symptoms and carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting are associated with differences in risk of periprocedural stroke or death. Methods: We analyzed the 1180 symptomatic patients in CREST who received their assigned procedure and had clearly defined timing of symptoms. Patients were classified into 3 groups based on time from symptoms to procedure: <15, 15 to 60, and >60 days. Results: For carotid endarterectomy, risk of periprocedural stroke or death was not significantly different for the 2 later time periods relative to the earliest time period (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-2.49 for 15-60 days and hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-3.33 for >60 days; P=0.89). For carotid artery stenting, risk of periprocedural stroke or death was also not significantly different for later time periods relative to the earliest time period (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-2.40 for 15-60 days and hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-2.75 for >60 days; P=0.93). Conclusions: Time from symptoms to carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting did not alter periprocedural safety, supporting early revascularization regardless of modality. Clinical trial registration: URL: Unique identifier: NCT00004732.
    Stroke 10/2015; DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.011123 · 5.72 Impact Factor

  • Circulation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes 10/2015; 8(6 suppl 3):S81-S89. DOI:10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.114.001668 · 5.66 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and purpose: There is higher combined risk of stroke or death (S+D) at older ages with carotid stenting. We assess whether this can be attributed to patient or arterial characteristics that are in the pathway between older age and higher risk. Methods: Mediation analysis of selected patient (hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia) and arterial characteristics assessed at the clinical sites and the core laboratory (plaque length, eccentric plaque, ulcerated plaque, percent stenosis, peak systolic velocity, and location) was performed in 1123 carotid artery stenting-treated patients in the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial (CREST). We assessed the association of age with these characteristics, the association of these characteristics with stroke risk, and the amount of mediation of the association of age on the combined risk of periprocedural S+D with adjustment for these factors. Results: Only plaque length as measured at the sites increased with age, was associated with increased S+D risk and significantly mediated the association of age on S+D risk. However, adjustment for plaque length attenuated the increased risk per 10 years of age from 1.72 (95% confidence interval, 1.26-2.37) to 1.66 (95% confidence interval, 1.20-2.29), accounting for only 8% of the increased risk. Conclusions: Plaque length seems to be in the pathway between older age and higher risk of S+D among carotid artery stenting-treated patients, but it mediated only 8% of the age effect excess risk of carotid artery stenting in CREST. Other factors and mechanisms underlying the age effect need to be identified as plaque length will not identify elderly patients for whom stenting is safe relative to endarterectomy. Clinical trial registration: URL: Unique Identifier: NCT00004732.
    Stroke 09/2015; 46(10). DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.009516 · 5.72 Impact Factor

  • Journal of Neurological Surgery. Part A: Central European Neurosurgery 09/2015; 76(S 01). DOI:10.1055/s-0035-1564535 · 0.61 Impact Factor

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Post-hoc, we hypothesized that over the recruitment period of the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial (CREST), increasing experience and improved patient selection with carotid stenting, and to a lesser extent, carotid endarterectomy would contribute to lower periprocedural event rates. Three study periods with approximately the same number of patients were defined to span recruitment. Composite and individual rates of periprocedural stroke, myocardial infarction, and death rate were calculated separately by treatment assignment (carotid stenting/carotid endarterectomy). Temporal changes in unadjusted event rates, and rates after adjustment for temporal changes in patient characteristics, were assessed. For patients randomized to carotid stenting, there was no significant temporal change in the unadjusted composite rates that declined from 6.2% in the first period, to 4.9% in the second, and 4.6% in the third (P=0.28). Adjustment for patient characteristics attenuated the rates to 6.0%, 5.9%, and 5.6% (P=0.85). For carotid endarterectomy-randomized patients, both the composite and the combined stroke and death outcome decreased between periods 1 and 2 and then increased in period 3. The hypothesized temporal reduction of stroke+death events for carotid stenting-treated patients was not observed. Further adjustment for changes in patient characteristics between periods, including the addition of asymptomatic patients and a >50% decrease in proportion of octogenarians enrolled, resulted in practically identical rates. URL: Unique identifier: NCT00004732. © 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.
    Stroke 07/2015; 46(8). DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.008898 · 5.72 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: With patients living a decade or longer post-procedure, long-term data are needed to assess the durability of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy. Identifying characteristics of those consenting or declining to continue in long-term follow-up may suggest strategies to improve retention in clinical trials. This report describes differences between patients choosing or declining to continue follow-up for up to 10 years in the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial. Following completion of the primary outcome, patients who were in active Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial follow-up were asked to continue beyond their original 4-year commitment for a maximum of 10 years. The characteristics of those who consented were compared with those who declined. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression were used for analysis, and backwards stepwise logistic regression (the most parsimonious model) was used to determine the factors associated with continuation. Of the 1921 active Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial participants for whom consent to extend follow-up was requested, 1695 (88%; mean age: 68.4) consented; 226 (12%; mean age: 69.6) declined. Of those who did not consent versus those who consented, 66% versus 48% were symptomatic at baseline (p < 0.0001), at follow-up 28% versus 20% were smokers (p = 0.009), 85% versus 90% were hypertensive (p = 0.01), and 84% versus 94% were dyslipidemic (p < 0.0001). Additional factors that differed between those who did not consent and those who consented included the mean number of years in the study at time of consent (4.8 years vs 3.7 years (p = <0.0001)) and patients from sites that enrolled ≤30 patients compared to sites randomizing 30 or more (70% vs 52% (p < 0.0001)). Multivariable logistic regression indicated that those with lesser odds of consenting to the extended follow-up were older (odds ratio: 0.80; 95% confidence interval: 0.67, 0.96), more likely to be symptomatic (odds ratio: 0.58; 95% confidence interval: 0.42, 0.80), smokers (odds ratio: 0.48; 95% confidence interval: 0.34, 0.70), were in the study 5+ years versus <3 (odds ratio: 0.21; 95% confidence interval: 0.13, 0.34), and at a site that randomized <30 patients (odds ratio: 0.46; 95% confidence interval: 0.33, 0.63), while patients with dyslipidemia at follow-up had increased odds of consenting (odds ratio: 2.28 (1.47, 3.54)). Symptomatic status, increasing age, randomized at lower volume centers, and longer time in follow-up were associated with reduced odds of consenting to long-term follow-up. Identifying factors associated with reduced willingness to extend participation long-term can suggest targeted strategies to improve retention in future clinical trials. © The Author(s) 2015.
    Clinical Trials 06/2015; DOI:10.1177/1740774515590807 · 1.93 Impact Factor

  • Stroke 06/2015; 46(7). DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.009479 · 5.72 Impact Factor

  • Journal of Vascular Surgery 06/2015; 61(6):46S-47S. DOI:10.1016/j.jvs.2015.04.082 · 3.02 Impact Factor
  • Source

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cranial nerve injury (CNI) is the most common neurologic complication of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and can cause significant chronic disability. Data from prior randomized trials are limited and provide no health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes specific to CNI. Incidence of CNIs and their outcomes for patients in the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial (CREST) were examined to identify factors predictive of CNI and their impact on HRQOL. Incidence of CNIs, baseline and procedural characteristics, outcomes, and HRQOL scores were evaluated in the 1151 patients randomized to CEA and undergoing surgery ≤30 days. Patients with CNI were identified and classified using case report forms, adverse event data, and clinical notes. Baseline and procedural characteristics were compared using descriptive statistics. Clinical outcomes at 1 and 12 months were analyzed. All data were adjudicated by two neurologists and a vascular surgeon. HRQOL was evaluated using the Medical Outcomes Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey to assess general health and Likert scales for disease-specific outcomes at 2 weeks, 4 weeks, and 12 months after CEA. The effect of CNI on SF-36 subscales was evaluated using random effects growth curve models, and Likert scale data were compared by ordinal logistic regression. CNI was identified in 53 patients (4.6%). Cranial nerves injured were VII (30.2%), XII (24.5%), and IX/X (41.5%), and 3.8% had Horner syndrome. CNI occurred in 52 of 1040 patients (5.0%) receiving general anesthesia and in one of 111 patients (0.9%) operated on under local anesthesia (P = .05). No other predictive baseline or procedural factors were identified. Deficits resolved in 18 patients (34%) at 1 month and in 42 of 52 patients (80.8%) by 1 year. One patient died before the 1-year follow-up visit. The HRQOL evaluation showed no statistical difference between groups with and without CNI at any interval. By Likert scale analysis, the group with CNI showed a significant difference in the difficulty eating/swallowing parameter at 2 and 4 weeks (P < .001) but not at 1 year. In CREST, CNI occurred in 4.6% of patients undergoing CEA, with 34% resolution at 30 days and 80.8% at 1 year. The incidence of CNI was significantly higher in patients undergoing general anesthesia. CNI had a small and transient effect on HRQOL, negatively affecting only difficulty eating/swallowing at 2 and 4 weeks but not at 1 year. On the basis of these findings, we conclude that CNI is not a trivial consequence of CEA but rarely results in significant long-term disability. Copyright © 2015 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Journal of Vascular Surgery 03/2015; 61(5). DOI:10.1016/j.jvs.2014.12.039 · 3.02 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose is to determine whether patching during carotid endarterectomy (CEA) affects the perioperative and long-term risks of restenosis, stroke, death, and myocardial infarction as compared with primary closure. We identified all patients who were randomized and underwent CEA in Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial. CEA patients who received a patch were compared with patients who underwent CEA with primary closure without a patch. We compared periprocedural and 4-year event rates, 2-year restenosis rates, and rates of reoperation between the 2 groups. We further analyzed results by surgeon specialty. There were 1151 patients who underwent CEA (753 [65%] with patch and 329 [29%] with primary closure). We excluded 44 patients who underwent eversion CEA and 25 patients missing CEA data (5%). Patch use differed by surgeon specialty: 89% of vascular surgeons, 6% of neurosurgeons, and 76% of thoracic surgeons patched. Comparing patients who received a patch versus those who did not, there was a significant reduction in the 2-year risk of restenosis, and this persisted after adjustment by surgeon specialty (hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.74; P=0.006). There were no significant differences in the rates of periprocedural stroke and death (hazard ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-7.58; P=0.57), in immediate reoperation (hazard ratio, 0.6; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-2.27; P=0.45), or in the 4-year risk of ipsilateral stroke (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-3.63; P=0.71). Patch closure in CEA is associated with reduction in restenosis although it is not associated with improved clinical outcomes. Thus, more widespread use of patching should be considered to improve long-term durability. Unique identifier: NCT00004732. © 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.
    Stroke 01/2015; 46(3). DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.007634 · 5.72 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite increased carotid artery stenting (CAS) dissemination following the 2005 National Coverage Determination, to our knowledge, periprocedural and long-term outcomes have not been described among Medicare beneficiaries. To describe the incidence of outcomes during and after the periprocedural period among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing CAS. Observational study with a mean follow-up time of approximately 2 years among 22 516 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries at least 66 years old undergoing CAS (2005-2009) who were linked to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' CAS database. Database procedure dates were required to fall during a Medicare hospitalization for CAS. Periprocedural (30-day) and long-term risks of mortality and stroke or transient ischemic attack, as well as periprocedural myocardial infarction. Subgroups were based on sociodemographic, clinical, and center-level factors, as well as the Stenting and Angioplasty With Protection in Patients at High Risk for Endarterectomy (SAPPHIRE) trial or Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial (CREST) enrollment criteria. The mean patient age was 76.3 years, 60.5% were male, 93.8% were of white race, 91.2% were at high surgical risk, 47.4% were symptomatic, and 97.4% had carotid stenosis of at least 70%. Crude 30-day mortality, stroke or transient ischemic attack, and myocardial infarction risks were 1.7% (95% CI, 1.5%-1.8%), 3.3% (95% CI, 3.0%-3.5%), and 2.5% (95% CI, 2.3%-2.7%), respectively. Mortality during a mean follow-up time of 2 years was 32.0% (95% CI, 31.0%-33.0%), with rates of 37.3% (95% CI, 35.8%-38.7%) among symptomatic patients and 27.7% (95% CI, 26.4%-28.9%) among asymptomatic patients. Older age, symptomatic carotid stenosis, and nonelective hospital admission were associated with increased adjusted hazards of mortality and stroke or transient ischemic attack during and after the periprocedural period. The presence of a stroke center, government ownership, and a hospital bed capacity of 500 or more were associated with increased adjusted hazards of periprocedural mortality and stroke or transient ischemic attack. Few patients met the SAPPHIRE trial or CREST enrollment criteria primarily because physicians did not meet proficiency requirements either due to exceeding periprocedural complication trial thresholds or not meeting minimum CAS volume requirements. Competing risks may limit the benefits of CAS in certain Medicare beneficiaries, particularly among older and symptomatic patients who have higher periprocedural and long-term mortality risks. The generalizability of trials like the SAPPHIRE or CREST to the Medicare population may be limited, underscoring the need to evaluate real-world effectiveness of carotid stenosis treatments.
    JAMA Neurology 01/2015; 72(3). DOI:10.1001/jamaneurol.2014.3638 · 7.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial (CREST) is a multicenter randomized trial of stenting versus endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid disease. This study assesses management of vascular risk factors. Management was provided by the patient's physician, with biannual monitoring results collected by the local site. Therapeutic targets were low-density lipoprotein, cholesterol <100 mg/dL, systolic blood pressure <140 mm Hg, fasting blood glucose <126 mg/dL, and nonsmoking status. Optimal control was defined as achieving all 4 goals concurrently. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare risk factors at baseline with those observed in scheduled follow-up visits for up to 48 months. In the analysis cohort of 2210, significant improvements in risk-factor control were observed across risk factors for all follow-up visits compared with baseline. At 48 months, achievement of the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal improved from 59.1% to 73.6% (P<0.001), achievement of the systolic blood pressure goal improved from 51.6% to 65.1% (P<0.001), achievement of the glucose goal improved from 74.9% to 80.7% (P=0.0101), and nonsmoking improved from 74.4% to 80.9% (P<0.0001). The percentage with optimal risk-factor control also improved significantly, from 16.7% to 36.2% (P<0.001), but nearly 2 of 3 study participants did not achieve optimal control during the study. Site-based risk-factor control improved significantly in the first 6 months and over the long term in CREST but was often suboptimal. Intensive medical management should be considered for future trials of carotid revascularization. Unique identifier: NCT00004732. © 2014 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.
    Journal of the American Heart Association 10/2014; 3(6). DOI:10.1161/JAHA.114.001180 · 4.31 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives: This study sought to determine the feasibility, safety, and exploratory efficacy of the Embrella Embolic Deflector (EED) system (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Background: Few data exist on the value of using embolic protection devices during TAVR. Methods: This pilot study included 52 patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR. The EED system was used in 41 patients, whereas 11 patients underwent TAVR without embolic protection (control group). Cerebral diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) was performed at baseline and within 7 days and 30 days after TAVR. Results: The EED system was successfully deployed at the level of the aortic arch in all patients with no complications. The deployment of the EED system was associated with high-intensity transient signals (HITS) as evaluated by transcranial Doppler (median: 48 [interquartile range: 17 to 198] HITS), and a higher total number of HITS was observed in the EED group (p < 0.001 vs. control group). DW-MRI performed within 7 days after TAVR showed the presence of new ischemic lesions in all patients in both groups, with a median number of 7 (interquartile range: 3 to 13) lesions per patient. The use of the EED system was associated with a lower lesion volume compared with the control group (p = 0.003). All new cerebral lesions had disappeared on the DW-MRI performed at 30 days after TAVR. Two strokes unrelated to the EED system occurred 2 and 29 days after TAVR. Conclusions: This study showed the feasibility and safety of using the EED system in TAVR procedures. The EED system did not prevent the occurrence of cerebral microemboli during TAVR or new transient ischemic lesions as evaluated by DW-MRI, but it was associated with a reduction in lesion volume. Further studies are warranted to determine the efficacy of using the EED system during TAVR procedures.
    JACC Cardiovascular Interventions 10/2014; 7(10):1146-55. DOI:10.1016/j.jcin.2014.04.019 · 7.35 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and Purpose Evidence indicates that center volume of cases affects outcomes for both carotid endarterectomy and stenting. We evaluated the effect of enrollment volume by site on complication rates in the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial (CREST). Methods The primary composite end point was any stroke, myocardial infarction, or death within 30 days or ipsilateral stroke in follow-up. The 477 approved surgeons performed >12 procedures per year with complication rates <3% for asymptomatic patients and <5% for symptomatic patients; 224 interventionists were certified after a rigorous 2 step credentialing process. CREST centers were divided into tertiles based on the number of patients enrolled into the study, with Group 1 sites enrolling <25 patients, Group 2 sites enrolling 25 to 51 patients, and Group 3 sites enrolling >51 patients. Differences in periprocedural event rates for the primary composite end point and its components were compared using logistic regression adjusting for age, sex, and symptomatic status within site-volume level. Results The safety of carotid angioplasty and stenting and carotid endarterectomy did not vary by site-volume during the periprocedural period as indicated by occurrence of the primary end point (P=0.54) or by stroke and death (P=0.87). A trend toward an inverse relationship between center enrollment volume and complications was mitigated by adjustment for known risk factors. Conclusions Complication rates were low in CREST and were not associated with center enrollment volume. The data are consistent with the value of rigorous training and credentialing in trials evaluating endovascular devices and surgical procedures. Clinical Trial Registration URL: Unique identifier: NCT00004732.
    Stroke 09/2014; 45(11). DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.006228 · 5.72 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and Purpose The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial was completed with a low stroke and death rate. A lead-in series of patients receiving carotid artery stenting was used to select the physician-operators for the study, where performance was evaluated by complication rates and by peer review of cases. Herein, we assess the potential contribution of statistical evaluation of complication rates. Methods The ability to discriminate between stent operators who can successfully meet the published guideline of <3% combined rate of stroke and death is calculated under the binomial distribution, based on a small consecutive case series (n=24 patients). Results A criterion of 2 stroke or death events among the 24 patients (<8% event rate) was required of operators. Setting such a high criterion, however, ensures an inability to exclude operators who cannot meet the criteria. In fact, if a good operator is defined as having a 2% event rate and a poor operator as a 6% event rate, even a series of 240 patients would (on average) still exclude 5.4% of the good operators and include 4.6% of the poor operators. Conclusions The low periprocedural event rates in the trial suggest success in separating skillful operators from less skillful. However, it seems unlikely that statistical assessment of event rates in the lead-in contributed to successful selection, but rather successful selection was more likely because of peer review of subjective and other factors including patient volume and technical approaches. Clinical Trial Registration URL: Unique identifier: NCT00004732.
    Stroke 09/2014; 45(11). DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.006807 · 5.72 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Alteplase is effective for treatment of acute ischaemic stroke but debate continues about its use after longer times since stroke onset, in older patients, and among patients who have had the least or most severe strokes. We assessed the role of these factors in affecting good stroke outcome in patients given alteplase. Methods We did a pre-specified meta-analysis of individual patient data from 6756 patients in nine randomised trials comparing alteplase with placebo or open control. We included all completed randomised phase 3 trials of intravenous alteplase for treatment of acute ischaemic stroke for which data were available. Retrospective checks confirmed that no eligible trials had been omitted. We defined a good stroke outcome as no significant disability at 3–6 months, defined by a modified Rankin Score of 0 or 1. Additional outcomes included symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (defined by type 2 parenchymal haemorrhage within 7 days and, separately, by the SITS-MOST definition of parenchymal type 2 haemorrhage within 36 h), fatal intracranial haemorrhage within 7 days, and 90-day mortality. Findings Alteplase increased the odds of a good stroke outcome, with earlier treatment associated with bigger proportional benefit. Treatment within 3·0 h resulted in a good outcome for 259 (32·9%) of 787 patients who received alteplase versus 176 (23·1%) of 762 who received control (OR 1·75, 95% CI 1·35–2·27); delay of greater than 3·0 h, up to 4·5 h, resulted in good outcome for 485 (35·3%) of 1375 versus 432 (30·1%) of 1437 (OR 1·26, 95% CI 1·05–1·51); and delay of more than 4·5 h resulted in good outcome for 401 (32·6%) of 1229 versus 357 (30·6%) of 1166 (OR 1·15, 95% CI 0·95–1·40). Proportional treatment benefits were similar irrespective of age or stroke severity. Alteplase significantly increased the odds of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (type 2 parenchymal haemorrhage definition 231 [6·8%] of 3391 vs 44 [1·3%] of 3365, OR 5·55, 95% CI 4·01–7·70, p<0·0001; SITS-MOST definition 124 [3·7%] vs 19 [0·6%], OR 6·67, 95% CI 4·11–10·84, p<0·0001) and of fatal intracranial haemorrhage within 7 days (91 [2·7%] vs 13 [0·4%]; OR 7·14, 95% CI 3·98–12·79, p<0·0001). The relative increase in fatal intracranial haemorrhage from alteplase was similar irrespective of treatment delay, age, or stroke severity, but the absolute excess risk attributable to alteplase was bigger among patients who had more severe strokes. There was no excess in other early causes of death and no significant effect on later causes of death. Consequently, mortality at 90 days was 608 (17·9%) in the alteplase group versus 556 (16·5%) in the control group (hazard ratio 1·11, 95% CI 0·99–1·25, p=0·07). Taken together, therefore, despite an average absolute increased risk of early death from intracranial haemorrhage of about 2%, by 3–6 months this risk was offset by an average absolute increase in disability-free survival of about 10% for patients treated within 3·0 h and about 5% for patients treated after 3·0 h, up to 4·5 h. Interpretation Irrespective of age or stroke severity, and despite an increased risk of fatal intracranial haemorrhage during the first few days after treatment, alteplase significantly improves the overall odds of a good stroke outcome when delivered within 4·5 h of stroke onset, with earlier treatment associated with bigger proportional benefits. Funding UK Medical Research Council, British Heart Foundation, University of Glasgow, University of Edinburgh.
    The Lancet 08/2014; DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60584-5 · 45.22 Impact Factor

  • Journal of Vascular Surgery 08/2014; 60(2):543. DOI:10.1016/j.jvs.2014.05.072 · 3.02 Impact Factor

Publication Stats

24k Citations
2,389.03 Total Impact Points


  • 2014-2015
    • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
      Нью-Брансуик, New Jersey, United States
  • 2003-2014
    • Mayo Clinic - Rochester
      Rochester, Minnesota, United States
  • 2001-2014
    • Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research
      • • Division of Cardiovascular Diseases
      • • Department of Neurology
      • • Department of Pharmacology
      Rochester, Michigan, United States
    • University of California, San Diego
      • Department of Neurosciences
      San Diego, CA, United States
    • University of Texas Medical School
      • Department of Neurology
      Houston, Texas, United States
  • 2012
    • Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
      Rotterdam, South Holland, Netherlands
  • 2011
    • ASA College
      New York, New York, United States
  • 1997-2010
    • Rutgers New Jersey Medical School
      • Department of Surgery
      Newark, New Jersey, United States
  • 1988-2009
    • University of Cincinnati
      • • Department of Neurology
      • • Department of Emergency Medicine
      • • Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and Computer Science
      Cincinnati, Ohio, United States
  • 2008
    • University of Innsbruck
      Innsbruck, Tyrol, Austria
  • 2007
    • University of Florida
      Gainesville, Florida, United States
  • 2004-2007
    • Emory University
      • Department of Neurology
      Atlanta, Georgia, United States
  • 2006
    • University of Groningen
      • Department of Surgery
      Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
  • 2005-2006
    • Mayo Clinic
      Jacksonville, Florida, United States
    • University of Washington Seattle
      Seattle, Washington, United States
  • 2000
    • American Heart Association
      Dallas, Texas, United States
  • 1993-1997
    • University of Cincinnati Medical Center
      Cincinnati, Ohio, United States
  • 1989
    • Wake Forest University
      Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States