METHODS: This self-controlled case series study used nationwide health database from Malaysia. The study included individuals aged ≥18 years who were hospitalised between 24 February 2021 and 30 June 2022. Outcomes were composite of MACCE: stroke, acute ischaemic heart disease, and cardiovascular death. Exposures were COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection. The risk period was day 1 to day 21 following exposure. Conditional Poisson regression model was used to estimate the incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95 % confidence interval (CI) comparing the outcomes in the risk and control periods.

RESULTS: The risk of MACCE within 21 days after vaccination per 100,000 doses administered were 12.0 (95% CI 11.9-12.1) (BNT162b2), 9.2 (95% CI 9.1-9.3) (CoronaVac), and 6.8 (95% CI 6.6-7.0) (ChAdOx1). The incidence rate ratios showed no increased risk of MACCE associated with the first, second, or third doses of BNT162b2, CoronaVac, and ChAdOx1 vaccines for individuals without prior cardiovascular disease (CVD). This finding was consistent for individuals with CVD. Vaccine booster dose, whether in a homologous or heterologous schedule, did not show increased risk of MACCE. Analysis by ethnic groups detected a slightly elevated risk of MACCE in Indian after the first dose of ChAdOx1 (IRR 1.64; 95% CI 1.08-2.48) in those without CVD. No significant association were observed in other subgroup analyses. SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with significantly increased risk of MACCE in individuals without CVD (IRR 3.54; 95% CI 3.32-3.76) and with CVD (IRR 1.98; 95% CI 1.61-2.34).

METHODS: This scoping review uses the methodological framework of Arksey and O'Malley. A comprehensive search of academic journals (English) on this topic published from 2007 to 2017 was conducted. A total of 22 studies were selected from 585 studies screened from the electronic databases.

RESULTS: First-year stroke recurrence rates are in the range of 2.2% to 25.4%. Besides that, modifiable risk factors are significantly associated with pathophysiological factors (hypertension, ankle-brachial pressure index, atherogenic dyslipidaemia, diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome, and atrial fibrillation) and lifestyle factors (obesity, smoking, physical inactivity, and high salt intake). Furthermore, age, previous history of cerebrovascular events, and stroke subtype are also significant influence risk factors for recurrence. A strategic secondary prevention method for recurrent stroke is health education along with managing risk factors through a combination of appropriate lifestyle intervention and pharmacological therapy.

METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study of adults aged 18 and above attending a blood pressure screening program in community in conjunction with May Measurement Month 2017 in Malaysia. A structured self-administered questionnaire was given to the participants who gave verbal consent. Data analysis was done using SPSS v. 23 and multiple logistic regression was used to identify the determinants of knowledge on actions to be taken during stroke and recognition of stroke symptoms.

RESULTS: Out of 4096 respondents, 82.9-92.1% of them able to recognise the common stroke symptoms. and 74.2% of the study respondents will go to hospital within 4.5 h of stroke onset. According to binomial logistic regression analyses, adults aged 45 years old and above (OR 1.39 95%CI 1.01-1.92), being Malay (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.27-2.40), being non-smokers (OR = 2.491, 95% CI: 1.64-3.78), hypertensives (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.02-2.42)and diabetics (OR: 2.54, 95% CI:1.38-4.69) are determinants of right actions to be taken during stroke. Meanwhile, respondents aged 45 years old and older (OR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.39-2.03), being Malay (OR = 1.49, 95% CI: 1.24-1.79), hypertensive (OR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.04-1.66) and those who had a previous history of stroke (OR = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.01-5.00) are determinants of good recognition of stroke symptoms.

METHODS: We did an international, randomised placebo-controlled trial in adults with intracerebral haemorrhage from acute stroke units at 124 hospital sites in 12 countries. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 1 g intravenous tranexamic acid bolus followed by an 8 h infusion of 1 g tranexamic acid or a matching placebo, within 8 h of symptom onset. Randomisation was done centrally in real time via a secure website, with stratification by country and minimisation on key prognostic factors. Treatment allocation was concealed from patients, outcome assessors, and all other health-care workers involved in the trial. The primary outcome was functional status at day 90, measured by shift in the modified Rankin Scale, using ordinal logistic regression with adjustment for stratification and minimisation criteria. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN93732214.

FINDINGS: We recruited 2325 participants between March 1, 2013, and Sept 30, 2017. 1161 patients received tranexamic acid and 1164 received placebo; the treatment groups were well balanced at baseline. The primary outcome was assessed for 2307 (99%) participants. The primary outcome, functional status at day 90, did not differ significantly between the groups (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·88, 95% CI 0·76-1·03, p=0·11). Although there were fewer deaths by day 7 in the tranexamic acid group (101 [9%] deaths in the tranexamic acid group vs 123 [11%] deaths in the placebo group; aOR 0·73, 0·53-0·99, p=0·0406), there was no difference in case fatality at 90 days (250 [22%] vs 249 [21%]; adjusted hazard ratio 0·92, 95% CI 0·77-1·10, p=0·37). Fewer patients had serious adverse events after tranexamic acid than after placebo by days 2 (379 [33%] patients vs 417 [36%] patients), 7 (456 [39%] vs 497 [43%]), and 90 (521 [45%] vs 556 [48%]).

INTERPRETATION: Functional status 90 days after intracerebral haemorrhage did not differ significantly between patients who received tranexamic acid and those who received placebo, despite a reduction in early deaths and serious adverse events. Larger randomised trials are needed to confirm or refute a clinically significant treatment effect.