Active clinical trials for "Ischemic Stroke"

A Phase 3 study to examine the safety and effectiveness of the allogeneic, adult stem cell investigational product, MultiStem, in adults who have suffered an acute ischemic stroke in the previous 18-36 hours.

Anticoagulant treatment for non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) associated with cerebral infarction/ TIA is one of the recognized treatment of stroke prevention. The ACC/AHA and national guidelines for the management of anticoagulation recommend that most of AF patients with cerebral infarction or TIA should be administrated anticoagulant therapy within 14 days of symptom onset, while European guidelines recommend that the timing of the initiation of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for AF patients with cerebral infarction or TIA is association with stroke severity in light of the "1-3-6-12" principle. However, there are still many problems about the use of NOACs in ischemic stroke with AF. for example, it is unclear what time to begin NOACs as to difference in stroke severity, ages, comorbidity with hypertension, diabetes, heart failure, liver and kidney dysfunction and bleeding risks. Thus, the timing of the initiation of NOACs is yet to be further studied. Current urgent need is to develop a guideline-based specific regimen in which the benefit-risk factors are further balanced with a combination of NHISS, CHA2DS2-VASC and HAS-BLED score. Rivaroxaban, a direct coagulation factor Ⅹa inhibitor, blocks the formation of the clot. ROCKET-AF study has shown that the efficacy of rivaroxaban is not inferior to that of warfarin in AF patients on stroke prevention, and rivaroxaban has a significantly decreased bleeding risk compared with warfarin. Recent study indicates that early administration with rivaroxaban for AF patients within 14 days of onset does not significantly increase hemorrhagic transformation. However, the relevant clinical data of the efficacy and safety of early initiation of rivaroxaban in AF patients with cerebral infarction or TIA are lacking in China. Therefore, the investigators conduct a multicenter cohort study to investigate the safety of early rivaroxaban in the AF patient with cerebral infarction or TIA within 12 days of onset.

Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin for Stroke Patients With Antiphospholipid Syndrome, With or Without SLE (RISAPS): a Randomised, Controlled, Open label, Phase II/III, Non-inferiority Trial. 140 patients will be randomised with a ratio of 1:1 to receive either: Rivaroxaban 15mg twice daily orally for 24 months or Warfarin (standard of care in the RISAPS trial) to maintain a target INR of 3.5 (range 3.0-4.0) for 24 months. The primary outcome of the trial is the rate of change in brain white matter hyperintensity (WMH) volume between baseline and 24 months follow up, assessed on brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), a surrogate marker of ischaemic damage.

Study Design: Lixiana Acute Stroke Evaluation Registry (LASER) is a randomized controlled trial with an associated registry. Patients with previously known or newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF) and acute ischemic stroke within five days will be randomized 2:1 to early (≤ 5 days) or delayed (6-14 days) edoxaban initiation. Ischemic stroke will be defined as evidence of acute focal cerebral infarction confirmed on CT/MRI and/or focal hypoperfusion/vessel occlusion on multimodal CT, or by sudden focal and objective neurological deficits (i.e NIHSS ≥ 1) of presumed ischemic origin persisting > 24 hours. Study Aim and Objectives: The primary aim of LASER is to demonstrate the safety of edoxaban initiation within five days of cardioembolic stroke. Secondary aim is to determine predictors of hemorrhagic transformation (HT) after cardioembolic stroke. Investigators will systematically assess prospectively collected Computed Tomography (CT) scan images for evidence of HT and re-infarction.

Intracranial atherosclerotic disease is the most common cause of ischemic stroke that is directly attributed to the progression or rupture of intracranial high-risk plaque in Asia. Many studies mainly from Euro-American population with a focus on extracranial carotid plaque have fully demonstrated the advantages of intensive statin therapy on stabilizing or reversing plaque burden, reversing plaque composition presenting that lipid-rich necrotic core (LRNC) is gradually replaced by fibrous tissue, and even reversing pattern of arterial remodeling to reduce the occurrence of cerebrovascular events. Yet, direct evidence of the effect of intensive statin therapy on intracranial atherosclerotic plaques is lacking and the effect of statin intensity and duration on intracranial plaque burden and composition is still unclear. High resolution magnetic resonance imaging (HRMRI) is a new and non-invasive technique that enable to assess the morphologic characteristics of vascular wall and plaque composition of intracranial artery. Based on above discussion, the investigators conduct this study to further determine the effect of intensive statin in ischemic stroke with intracranial atherosclerotic plaques.

Researchers are looking for a better way to prevent an ischemic stroke which occurs when a blood clot travelled to the brain in people who within the last 72 hours had: an acute stroke due to a blood clot that formed outside the heart (acute non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke), or TIA/mini-stroke with a high risk of turning into a stroke (high-risk transient ischemic attack), and who are planned to receive standard of care therapy. Acute ischemic strokes or TIA/mini-stroke result from a blocked or reduced blood flow to a part of the brain. They are caused by blood clots that travel to the brain and block the vessels that supply it. If these blood clots form elsewhere than in the heart, the stroke is called non-cardioembolic. People who already had a non-cardioembolic stroke are more likely to have another stroke. This is why they are treated preventively with an antiplatelet therapy, the current standard of care. Antiplatelet medicines prevent platelets, components of blood clotting, from clumping together. Anticoagulants are another type of medicine that prevents blood clots from forming by interfering with a process known as coagulation (or blood clotting). The study treatment asundexian is a new type of anticoagulant currently under development to provide further treatment options. Asundexian aims to further improve the standard of care without increasing the risk of bleeding. The main purpose of this study is to learn whether asundexian works better than placebo at reducing ischemic strokes in participants who recently had a non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or TIA/mini-stroke when given in addition to standard antiplatelet therapy. A placebo is a treatment that looks like a medicine but does not have any medicine in it. Another aim is to compare the occurrence of major bleeding events during the study between the asundexian and the placebo group. Major bleedings have a serious or even life-threatening impact on a person's health. Dependent on the treatment group, the participants will either take asundexian or placebo as tablets once a day for at least 3 months up to 31 months. Approximately every 3 months during the treatment period, either a phone call or a visit to the study site is scheduled on an alternating basis. In addition, one visit before and up to two visits after the treatment period are planned. During the study, the study team will: Check vital signs such as blood pressure and heart rate Examine the participants' heart health using an electrocardiogram (ECG) Take blood samples Ask the participants questions about how they are feeling and what adverse events they are having. An adverse event is any medical problem that a participant has during a study. Doctors keep track of all adverse events that happen in studies, even if they do not think the adverse events might be related to the study treatments. In addition, the participants will be asked to complete a questionnaire on quality of life at certain time points during the study.

Evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Timing Carotid Stent for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis in patients.

The recovery from a stroke is often incomplete. It is the leading cause of acquired permanent disability in the adult population. Persistent functional loss of the hand and arm contributes significantly to disability. However, the current standard of care to treat hand and arm movements are inadequate. There is an urgent need for innovative and effective therapies for recovery of the upper limb after stroke. Growing evidence shows that electrical spinal cord stimulation, combined with activity-dependent rehabilitation, enables voluntary movement of paralyzed muscles in some neurologic disorders, such as spinal cord injury. The investigators hypothesize that spinal networks that lost control after stroke can be activated by non-invasive electrical stimulation of the spinal cord to improve functional recovery. The aims of the study are: to determine the improvements in hand and arm function that result from the combined application of non-invasive spinal stimulation and activity-based rehabilitation. Surface electrodes placed over the skin of the neck will be used for non-invasive electrical stimulation of the spinal cord. Functional task practice will be used for activity-dependent rehabilitation, to evaluate long-lasting benefits to hand and arm function that persist beyond the period of spinal stimulation.

This is a randomized open-label, with blinded outcome pilot study to evaluate the effect on inflammatory laboratory values and explore clinical outcomes in patients who present with ischemic strokes due to large vessel occlusions and are treated with either current accepted management, or accepted management in addition to transcutaneous auricular vagal nerve stimulation.

Background: For moderate to severe carotid artery atherosclerotic stenosis, in the past decades, carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis. The transfemoral artery (TFA) using Seldinger's technique has been the most commonly used approach for CAS. The radial artery is an ideal puncture site for cerebrovascular intervention. Studies have shown that nerve intervention through radial artery approach can complete most cerebrovascular intervention procedures, including cerebral angiography, carotid artery stent implantation, vertebral artery stent implantation, intracranial artery stent implantation, mechanical thrombectomy, aspiration, intra-arterial thrombolysis and so on. However, the current studies are based on single center small sample studies, and there has been still a lack of large sample randomized controlled experiments to verify the safety and effectiveness of CAS in transradial artery (TRA) . Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of CAS via TRA in patients with carotid artery stenosis through a multicenter, prospective and randomized study. Study design: This study is a randomized, open label, multicenter, parallel controlled trial. A non-inferiority test is performed to compare the primary end point between the experimental group and the control group. The experimental group will undergo carotid stent implantation via radial artery approach, while the control group will use femoral artery approach. Study population: Adult patients with symptomatic carotid-artery stenosis ≥50% or asymptomatic stenosis ≥70%. Study outcomes: Primary end points: The incidence of death, or new-onset stroke, or myocardial infarction, or severe hemorrhage events within 30 days post-procedure Secondary end points:1. The incidence of death, new-onset stroke and myocardial infarction within 48 hours / 30 days post-procedure. 2. The incidence of death within 48 hours / 30 days post-procedure. 3. The incidence of new-onset stroke within 48 hours / 30 days post-procedure. 4. The incidence of myocardial infarction within 48 hours / 30 days post-procedure. 5. The incidence of severe hemorrhage events within 48 hours / 30 days post-procedure. Other end points: 1. Successful rate of DSA. 2. Successful rate of endovascular treatment. 3. Degree of patient-reported comfort. 4. Operation time 5. NIHSS score changes post-operation.6. mRS score score changes post-operation. 7. X-ray exposure. Safety outcomes: 1.Occurrence of all adverse events. 2. AEs related to operation and device. 3. Incidence of adverse event of special interest.