|
|
| 08:30-10:30 |
PERSONALIZED MEDICINE FOR STROKE; ASYMPTOMATIC INTRACRANIAL ANEURYSMS |
|
Chair: Boleslav Lichterman, Russia; Dimitar Maslarov, Bulgaria |
| 08:30-09:30 |
Debate: Should asymptomatic intracranial aneurysm always be treated? |
|
Capsule: Neuroimaging may discover incidentally intracranial aneurysms. This finding is often frightening for the patients and raises uncertainties to the treating physicians – to intervene or not to touch? This debate will address this question |
| 08:30-08:40 |
Host: Jorge Campos, Portugal |
| 08:40-08:55 |
To intervene: Pedro Castro, Portugal |
| 08:55-09:10 |
No: Daniel Bereczki, Hungary |
| 09:10-09:30 |
Discussion and rebuttals |
|
| 09:30-10:30 |
Debate: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) vs. personalized medicine in stroke victims |
|
Capsule: EBM based on randomized clinical trials (RCT's) is considered the "gold standard" in secondary stroke prevention therapy. However many question the generalizability of EBM approach and are convinced that "personalized" medicine is the more appropriate way to tailor the treatment to each individual patient. Which is the best approach? |
| 09:30-09:40 |
Host: Jonathan Streifler, Israel |
| 09:40-09:55 |
EBM: Antonio Vaz Carneiro, Portugal |
| 09:55-10:10 |
Personalized: Lou Caplan, USA |
| 10:10-10:30 |
Discussion and rebuttals |
|
| 10:45-12:45 |
THE RELEVANCE OF GENETIC TESTING FOR STROKE; MANAGEMENT OF CAROTID DISSECTIONS |
|
Chair: Elsa Azevedo, Portugal; Wei Wei Zhang, China |
| 10:45-11:45 |
Proposition: Genetic testing for stroke will soon be clinically relevant |
|
Capsule: Over the past few years, GWAS studies have identified several genetic markers for stroke. These include mainly those associated with atherosclerosis and their attributable risk is small. Will these genetic markers soon have immediate clinical applications? |
| 10:45-10:55 |
Host: Natan Bornstein, Israel |
| 10:55-11:10 |
Yes: Mike O'Sullivan, UK |
| 11:10-11:25 |
No: Hugh Markus, UK |
| 11:25-11:45 |
Discussion and rebuttals |
|
| 11:45-12:45 |
Debate: Carotid dissection: Should anticoagulants be used? |
|
Capsule: Carotid dissection is a common cause of acute ischemic stroke, especially in the young. The current guidelines and the common practice recommend the use of anticoagulants as the treatment of choice. Is it the best treatment? |
| 11:45-11:55 |
Host: Dieter Heiss, Germany |
| 11:55-12:10 |
Aspirin is all that is necessary: Hugh Markus, UK |
| 12:10-12:25 |
Anticoagulants should be used: José Ferro, Portugal |
| 12:25-12:45 |
Discussion and rebuttals |
|
| 15:00-17:00 |
ABCD2 FOR TIA; ANTICOAGULANT TREATMENT AFTER STROKE |
|
Chair: Manuel Correira, Portugal |
| 15:00-16:00 |
Debate: Is the ABCD2 grading useful for clinical management of TIA patients? |
|
Capsule: Stroke risk after TIA is high. The ABCD2 scale was established to identify high-risk TIA patients. Should the ABCD2 score influence and guide our management of TIA patients? Is it useful or maybe irrelevant? |
| 15:00-15:10 |
Host: Dieter Heiss, Germany |
| 15:10-15:25 |
Useful: Jonathan Streifler, Israel |
| 15:25-15:40 |
Unhelpful: Natan Bornstein, Israel |
| 15:40-16:00 |
Discussion and rebuttals |
|
| 16:00-17:00 |
Debate: Starting anticoagulants in post-stroke atrial fibrillation (AF) patients: How soon? |
|
Capsule: Anticoagulants are recommended in AF patients unless contraindicated. However, in all recent studies with NOAC's vs. warfarin in post-stroke patients, the treatment was started 7-10 days after stroke onset. Therefore it is still uncertain when anticoagulants should be started? Is it safe to start immediately after the onset of stroke? |
| 16:00-16:10 |
Host: Victor Oliveira, Portugal |
| 16:10-16:25 |
The sooner the better: Thorsten Steiner, Germany |
| 16:25-16:40 |
No: Jay P. Mohr, USA |
| 16:40-17:00 |
Discussion and rebuttals |
|
| 17:15-19:00 |
THROMBOLYSIS AND THROMBECTOMY FOR ACUTE ISCHEMIC STROKE; TESTING FOR THROMBOPHILIA IN CRYPTOGENIC STROKE
Chair: Joanna Wojczal, Poland; Natan Bornstein, Israel |
| 17:15-18:10 |
Debate: Endovascular therapy in acute stroke: Start with IV tPA or go directly to the catheter lab? |
|
Capsule: Several RCT's demonstrated that thrombectomy is superior to IV tPA in selected patients. In most of the trials, about 80% of the patients received IV tPA prior to endovascular therapy. Thus it is still not clear whether this "bridging" concept is superior to the "directly to the catheter lab" policy. This debate will try to clarify this important issue |
| 17:15-17:25 |
Host: Antonio Vaz Carneiro, Portugal |
| 17:25-17:40 |
Start with IV tPA: Daniel Bereczki, Hungary |
| 17:40-17:55 |
Directly to the catheter: João Sargento-Freitas, Portugal |
| 17:55-18:10 |
Discussion and rebuttals |
|
| 18:10-19:00 |
Debate: Testing for thrombophilia in cryptogenic stroke in the young: Is it useful? |
|
Capsule: It is common practice to order an extensive battery of blood tests for thrombophilia in young patients with stroke of unknown etiology. Is this expensive battery of blood tests worth the cost? |
| 18:10-18:20 |
Host: Ovidiu Bajenaru, Romania |
| 18:20-18:35 |
Useful: Mike O'Sullivan, UK |
| 18:35-18:50 |
No: José Ferro, Portugal |
| 18:50-19:00 |
Discussion and rebuttals |
