Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
It has been questionable whether the lack of proven pharmacological treatments in acute cerebral infarction (ACI) reflects ineffective drugs or only inadequacies in their assessment. The difficulties in developing a rationale for drug therapy in this condition favoured the former, although the latter possibility was supported by re-evaluation of most published trials. In this paper, a plausible rationale, in terms of our current understanding of both the drug and the condition, is expounded for treatment of ACI with naftidrofuryl. Guidelines for the design and conduct of clinical trials in acute stroke are discussed in relation to the particular problems posed: need for early initiation of treatment; need for, and difficulties of, diagnostic confirmation; matching of treatment groups by prognostic indicators of uncertain significance, and requirements for large numbers of patients and long-term follow-up. The practical application of these guidelines is tested in a clinical trial of naftidrofuryl conducted in a single centre on 100 patients with proven diagnoses. Rigorous attention to all aspects of selection, treatment and follow-up, with an explanatory approach to the trial design, was predicted to produce a positive result if the drug was effective. The findings were that naftidrofuryl treatment was associated with no change in death rate but with clinically and statistically significant improvements in neurological recovery and bed-occupancy. Better functional recovery was also noted, so that the trial result was coherent. It was concluded that a beneficial effect had been recorded, and consistency of this outcome with those of previous studies is demonstrated. A case is made for further studies to define exactly the role of this drug in the management of ACI.
Steiner et al. (Mon,) studied this question.