Emergent endovascular treatment versus medical treatment for acute large vessel occlusions with nondisabling symptoms.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Interventional Neuroradiology Pub Date : 2024-10-03 DOI:10.1177/15910199241286551
Aysenur Onalan, Erdem Gurkas, Ferhat Balgetir, Emrah Aytac, Cetin Kursad Akpinar, Hasan Cetin, Asli Ciftaslan, Sule Kavak Genc
{"title":"Emergent endovascular treatment versus medical treatment for acute large vessel occlusions with nondisabling symptoms.","authors":"Aysenur Onalan, Erdem Gurkas, Ferhat Balgetir, Emrah Aytac, Cetin Kursad Akpinar, Hasan Cetin, Asli Ciftaslan, Sule Kavak Genc","doi":"10.1177/15910199241286551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness and safety of medical treatment (MT) versus endovascular treatment (EVT) in acute large vessel occlusion patients with mild nondisabling stroke symptoms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study is a multicenter observational study in which data from patients at three stroke centers were prospectively obtained and retrospectively analyzed. Patients were included if they arrived for treatment within 6 h of stroke onset or last known well time and had a baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score of ≤5. Primary outcome was modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 0-2 at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), discharge NIHSS score, 90-day all-cause mortality and length of stay. Clinical outcomes were compared through a multivariable logistic regression after adjusting for age, treatment type admission and discharge NIHSS score, admission Alberta Stroke Program Early CT (ASPECT) score and length of stay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 82 patients included in the study, 42 were in the EVT group and 40 were in the MT group. The groups were similar in age (MT:66, EVT:64 age; <i>p </i>= .62), gender (MT:55%, EVT:54.8%; male) admission NIHSS score (MT:2, EVT:3 points; <i>p </i>= .26), ASPECT score (MT:10, EVT:9; <i>p</i> = .15). While discharge NIHSS score was found to be statistically significant between the groups (MT:1, EVT:2; <i>p </i>= .04). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of 90-day mRS scores (MT:1, EVT:1, <i>p </i>= .86) and mortality rates (MT:4, EVT:4; <i>p </i>= .94). In unadjusted analysis, sICH rates were similar between the MT and EVT groups (MT 5%, EVT 7.1%, <i>p = </i>.52). Neurological intensive care unit length of stay (MT:5 days, EVT:2 days <i>p </i>< .001<b>)</b>, inpatient clinic length of stay (MT:3, EVT:2 days <i>p </i>= .041), and total length of stay (MT:9 days, EVT:4 days <i>p </i>< .001) were significantly longer in the MT group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our multicenter study demonstrated that MT with blood pressure augmentation and anticoagulation at hyperacute stage is an alternative option for emergency large vessel occlusion patients with nondisabling mild stroke symptoms.</p>","PeriodicalId":49174,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Neuroradiology","volume":" ","pages":"15910199241286551"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11559871/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional Neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199241286551","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness and safety of medical treatment (MT) versus endovascular treatment (EVT) in acute large vessel occlusion patients with mild nondisabling stroke symptoms.

Methods: This study is a multicenter observational study in which data from patients at three stroke centers were prospectively obtained and retrospectively analyzed. Patients were included if they arrived for treatment within 6 h of stroke onset or last known well time and had a baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score of ≤5. Primary outcome was modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 0-2 at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), discharge NIHSS score, 90-day all-cause mortality and length of stay. Clinical outcomes were compared through a multivariable logistic regression after adjusting for age, treatment type admission and discharge NIHSS score, admission Alberta Stroke Program Early CT (ASPECT) score and length of stay.

Results: Of the 82 patients included in the study, 42 were in the EVT group and 40 were in the MT group. The groups were similar in age (MT:66, EVT:64 age; p = .62), gender (MT:55%, EVT:54.8%; male) admission NIHSS score (MT:2, EVT:3 points; p = .26), ASPECT score (MT:10, EVT:9; p = .15). While discharge NIHSS score was found to be statistically significant between the groups (MT:1, EVT:2; p = .04). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of 90-day mRS scores (MT:1, EVT:1, p = .86) and mortality rates (MT:4, EVT:4; p = .94). In unadjusted analysis, sICH rates were similar between the MT and EVT groups (MT 5%, EVT 7.1%, p = .52). Neurological intensive care unit length of stay (MT:5 days, EVT:2 days p < .001), inpatient clinic length of stay (MT:3, EVT:2 days p = .041), and total length of stay (MT:9 days, EVT:4 days p < .001) were significantly longer in the MT group.

Conclusions: Our multicenter study demonstrated that MT with blood pressure augmentation and anticoagulation at hyperacute stage is an alternative option for emergency large vessel occlusion patients with nondisabling mild stroke symptoms.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对于伴有非致残症状的急性大血管闭塞,紧急血管内治疗与药物治疗的对比。
研究目的本研究旨在分析药物治疗(MT)与血管内治疗(EVT)对有轻度非致残性卒中症状的急性大血管闭塞患者的有效性和安全性:本研究是一项多中心观察性研究,对三个卒中中心的患者数据进行前瞻性采集和回顾性分析。如果患者在卒中发生后 6 小时内或最后一次已知良好时间内到达医院接受治疗,且美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)基线评分≤5 分,则纳入研究对象。主要结果为 90 天后修改后兰金量表 (mRS) 评分 0-2 分。次要结果包括症状性颅内出血(sICH)、出院时 NIHSS 评分、90 天全因死亡率和住院时间。在对年龄、治疗类型、入院和出院NIHSS评分、入院阿尔伯塔省卒中项目早期CT(ASPECT)评分和住院时间进行调整后,通过多变量逻辑回归对临床结果进行比较:在纳入研究的82名患者中,EVT组42人,MT组40人。两组在年龄(MT:66 岁,EVT:64 岁;P = .62)、性别(MT:55%,EVT:54.8%;男性)、入院 NIHSS 评分(MT:2 分,EVT:3 分;P = .26)、ASPECT 评分(MT:10 分,EVT:9 分;P = .15)方面相似。出院时的 NIHSS 评分在两组之间有统计学意义(MT:1,EVT:2;p = .04)。两组患者的 90 天 mRS 评分(MT:1,EVT:1,p = .86)和死亡率(MT:4,EVT:4;p = .94)没有差异。在未经调整的分析中,MT 组和 EVT 组的 sICH 发生率相似(MT 5%,EVT 7.1%,p = .52)。神经重症监护室住院时间(MT:5 天,EVT:2 天,p )、住院门诊时间(MT:3 天,EVT:2 天,p = .041)和总住院时间(MT:9 天,EVT:4 天,p 结论:我们的多中心研究表明,对于有非致残性轻度卒中症状的急诊大血管闭塞患者来说,在超急性期使用 MT 并进行血压升高和抗凝治疗是一种替代选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Interventional Neuroradiology
Interventional Neuroradiology CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
11.80%
发文量
192
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Interventional Neuroradiology (INR) is a peer-reviewed clinical practice journal documenting the current state of interventional neuroradiology worldwide. INR publishes original clinical observations, descriptions of new techniques or procedures, case reports, and articles on the ethical and social aspects of related health care. Original research published in INR is related to the practice of interventional neuroradiology...
期刊最新文献
Circulating miRNA profiles as predictive biomarkers for aneurysm healing following endovascular treatment: a prospective study. "Chopperlysis": The effect of helicopter transport on reperfusion and outcomes in large vessel occlusion strokes. DWI lesions after intracranial aneurysm treatment with contour or WEB-does the device matter? Analysis of selective neurocritical care admission costs following elective endovascular treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms. Recognition of dural to pial supply in high-grade dural arteriovenous fistula: A technical note.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1