Skip to main content
Advertisement
  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Specialty Sites
    • COVID-19
    • Practice Current
    • Practice Buzz
    • Without Borders
    • Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
    • Innovations in Care Delivery
  • Collections
    • Topics A-Z
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Infographics
    • Patient Pages
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Translations
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Center

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Specialty Sites
    • COVID-19
    • Practice Current
    • Practice Buzz
    • Without Borders
    • Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
    • Innovations in Care Delivery
  • Collections
    • Topics A-Z
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Infographics
    • Patient Pages
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Translations
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Center
  • Home
  • Latest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Residents & Fellows

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Neurology
Home
The most widely read and highly cited peer-reviewed neurology journal
  • Subscribe
  • My Alerts
  • Log in
Site Logo
  • Home
  • Latest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Residents & Fellows

Share

March 05, 2013; 80 (10) WriteClick: Editor’s Choice

Antiplatelets vs anticoagulation for dissection: CADISS nonrandomized arm and meta-analysisAuthor Response

Louis R. Caplan, Hugh S. Markus
First published March 4, 2013, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000427910.00596.db
Louis R. Caplan
Boston
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hugh S. Markus
Boston
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Full PDF
Citation
Antiplatelets vs anticoagulation for dissection: CADISS nonrandomized arm and meta-analysisAuthor Response
Louis R. Caplan, Hugh S. Markus
Neurology Mar 2013, 80 (10) 970-971; DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000427910.00596.db

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Permissions

Make Comment

See Comments

Downloads
1652

Share

  • Article
  • Info & Disclosures
Loading

The Cervical Artery Dissection in Stroke Study (CADISS-NR) trial concluded that there was no difference in secondary stroke prevention provided by antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents in patients with carotid or vertebral artery dissections.1 It is important to note that the mean time of treatment after symptom onset was 10.8 days (SD 7.0, range 1–31 days) in this study.

Extensive published data2,3 and my personal experience show that most strokes develop within the first 7 days after brain ischemia and the rate of stroke thereafter is very low. In addition, strokes are uncommon in patients whose presentation does not include brain ischemia (neck pain, Horner syndrome, compression of nerve roots, or lower cranial nerves). These patients were included in the trial. In CADISS-NR, only 2 patients had strokes within 3 months.

In the meta-analysis included in the report, almost all of the patients were enrolled beyond 5 days after onset. Physicians must not take the results of this trial and the meta-analysis to conclude anything about treatment during the very acute period after brain symptom onset. This time period was not a part of the trial or the meta-analysis. When brain infarction develops in the acute stage, it is almost always explained by embolism of red erythrocyte-fibrin thromboemboli.4 This pathogenesis would predict that acute anticoagulation would be more effective than antiplatelets during the first week and experience has shown that acute anticoagulation is effective.5

Author Response

Dr. Caplan raises an important point: Some studies suggest that the risk of recurrent stroke in patients with cervical dissection is highest in the first few days after initial clinical symptoms. For this reason, the ongoing randomized arm of CADISS is recruiting patients within 7 days of symptom onset. The nonrandomized arm, the results of which are included in our current report, included patients who were ineligible for the randomized arm. Fifty-three of the 88 patients were included in the nonrandomized—rather than the randomized—arm because they were recruited later than 7 days after first symptoms. However, even in the remaining 35 (with some recruited on the first day after presentation), the risk of recurrent stroke was not high.

Convincing arguments can be made as to whether anticoagulants or antiplatelets may be more effective in preventing recurrent stroke in cervical dissection. However, whether anticoagulants or antiplatelets will be more effective during the acute phase can only be answered by randomized trials such as CADISS.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Kennedy F,
    2. Lanfranconi S,
    3. Hicks C,
    4. et al
    ; on behalf of the CADISS Investigators. Antiplatelets vs anticoagulation for dissection: CADISS nonrandomized arm and meta-analysis. Neurology 2012;79:686–689.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Biousse V,
    2. D’Anglejan-Chatillon J,
    3. Toboul PJ,
    4. Amarenco P,
    5. Bousser MG
    . Time course of symptoms in extracranial carotid artery dissections: a series of 80 patients. Stroke 1995;26:235–239.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Beletsky V,
    2. Nadareishvili Z,
    3. Lynch J,
    4. Shuaib A,
    5. Woolfenden A,
    6. Norris JW
    . Cervical arterial dissection: time for a therapeutic trial? Stroke 2003;34:2856–2860.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Baumgartner RW,
    2. Bogousslavsky J,
    3. Caso V,
    4. Paciaroni M
    1. Baumagartner RW,
    2. Bogousslavsky J
    . Clinical manifestations of carotid dissection. In: Baumgartner RW, Bogousslavsky J, Caso V, Paciaroni M, editors. Handbook on Cerebral Artery Dissection. Basel: Karger; 2005:70–76.
  5. 5.↵
    1. Schievink WI
    . The treatment of spontaneous carotid and vertebral artery dissections. Curr Opin Cardiol 2000;15:316–321.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  • © 2013 American Academy of Neurology

Disputes & Debates: Rapid online correspondence

No comments have been published for this article.
Comment

NOTE: All authors' disclosures must be entered and current in our database before comments can be posted. Enter and update disclosures at http://submit.neurology.org. Exception: replies to comments concerning an article you originally authored do not require updated disclosures.

  • Stay timely. Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
  • Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
  • 200 words maximum.
  • 5 references maximum. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
  • 5 authors maximum. Exception: replies can include all original authors of the article.
  • Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.

More guidelines and information on Disputes & Debates

Compose Comment

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
NOTE: The first author must also be the corresponding author of the comment.
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Publishing Agreement
NOTE: All authors, besides the first/corresponding author, must complete a separate Disputes & Debates Submission Form and provide via email to the editorial office before comments can be posted.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

You May Also be Interested in

Back to top
  • Article
    • References
  • Info & Disclosures
Advertisement

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.

Alert Me

  • Alert me when eletters are published
Neurology: 96 (15)

Articles

  • Ahead of Print
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Popular Articles
  • Translations

About

  • About the Journals
  • Ethics Policies
  • Editors & Editorial Board
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise

Submit

  • Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Information for Reviewers
  • AAN Guidelines
  • Permissions

Subscribers

  • Subscribe
  • Activate a Subscription
  • Sign up for eAlerts
  • RSS Feed
Site Logo
  • Visit neurology Template on Facebook
  • Follow neurology Template on Twitter
  • Visit Neurology on YouTube
  • Neurology
  • Neurology: Clinical Practice
  • Neurology: Genetics
  • Neurology: Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • AAN.com
  • AANnews
  • Continuum
  • Brain & Life
  • Neurology Today

Wolters Kluwer Logo

Neurology | Print ISSN:0028-3878
Online ISSN:1526-632X

© 2021 American Academy of Neurology

  • Privacy Policy
  • Feedback
  • Advertise