Endovascular Thrombectomy Versus Best Medical Management Beyond 24 Hours From Last Known Well in Acute Ischemic Stroke Due to Large Vessel Occlusion

IF 2.1 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) Pub Date : 2023-04-28 DOI:10.1161/svin.122.000790
P. Dhillon, Waleed Z. Butt, T. Jovin, A. Podlasek, N. McConachie, R. Lenthall, S. Nair, Luqman Malik, K. Krishnan, R. Dineen, T. England
{"title":"Endovascular Thrombectomy Versus Best Medical Management Beyond 24 Hours From Last Known Well in Acute Ischemic Stroke Due to Large Vessel Occlusion","authors":"P. Dhillon, Waleed Z. Butt, T. Jovin, A. Podlasek, N. McConachie, R. Lenthall, S. Nair, Luqman Malik, K. Krishnan, R. Dineen, T. England","doi":"10.1161/svin.122.000790","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n The safety and efficacy of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion presenting beyond 24 hours from last known well (LKW) remains undetermined.\n \n \n \n In this single center study, we identified patients with large vessel occlusion who were eligible for EVT based on noncontrast computed tomography (CT)/CT angiography (without CT perfusion or magnetic resonance imaging) using an Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score of ≥5, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale of ≥6, and presenting beyond 24 hours from LKW, between January 2018 and March 2022. During the study period, EVT service limitations meant patients eligible for EVT presenting outside service hours, routinely received best medical management (BMM). Functional and safety outcomes were compared between patients receiving EVT or BMM following multivariable adjustment for age, baseline stroke severity, Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score, time from LKW, IV thrombolysis, and clot location.\n \n \n \n \n Among 35 patients presenting beyond 24 hours from LKW and eligible for EVT, 19 (54%) were treated with EVT and 16 (46%) with BMM. Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score were similar across both groups (EVT: 7 [6.75–8] versus BMM: 7 [6–8]), but not the baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (EVT: 17 [11–19.5] versus BMM: 20 [9.75–26]). No significant difference was observed between the EVT and BMM groups in the symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (5.3% versus 0%;\n P\n =0.28) or mortality (26.3% versus 37.5%;\n P\n =0.42) rates, respectively. The modified Rankin scale at 90 days (adjusted common odds ratio [OR], 1.94; [95% CI 0.42–8.87];\n P\n =0.39) and functional independence rate, although numerically higher in the EVT group compared with the BMM group (modified Rankin scale≤2; 36.9% versus 18.8%; adjusted OR, 4.34; [95% CI 0.34–54.83];\n P\n =0.25), were not significantly different. 94.7% of patients treated with EVT achieved successful reperfusion (modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 2b–3).\n \n \n \n \n In routine clinical practice, EVT beyond 24 hours from LKW appears safe and feasible, when performed in patients with acute ischemic stroke who were deemed eligible for EVT by noncontrast CT /CT angiography alone. A large collaborative randomized trial assessing the efficacy of EVT beyond 24 hours is warranted. Our findings provide a basis for the sample size estimate for an adequately powered trial.\n","PeriodicalId":74875,"journal":{"name":"Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/svin.122.000790","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The safety and efficacy of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion presenting beyond 24 hours from last known well (LKW) remains undetermined. In this single center study, we identified patients with large vessel occlusion who were eligible for EVT based on noncontrast computed tomography (CT)/CT angiography (without CT perfusion or magnetic resonance imaging) using an Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score of ≥5, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale of ≥6, and presenting beyond 24 hours from LKW, between January 2018 and March 2022. During the study period, EVT service limitations meant patients eligible for EVT presenting outside service hours, routinely received best medical management (BMM). Functional and safety outcomes were compared between patients receiving EVT or BMM following multivariable adjustment for age, baseline stroke severity, Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score, time from LKW, IV thrombolysis, and clot location. Among 35 patients presenting beyond 24 hours from LKW and eligible for EVT, 19 (54%) were treated with EVT and 16 (46%) with BMM. Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score were similar across both groups (EVT: 7 [6.75–8] versus BMM: 7 [6–8]), but not the baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (EVT: 17 [11–19.5] versus BMM: 20 [9.75–26]). No significant difference was observed between the EVT and BMM groups in the symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (5.3% versus 0%; P =0.28) or mortality (26.3% versus 37.5%; P =0.42) rates, respectively. The modified Rankin scale at 90 days (adjusted common odds ratio [OR], 1.94; [95% CI 0.42–8.87]; P =0.39) and functional independence rate, although numerically higher in the EVT group compared with the BMM group (modified Rankin scale≤2; 36.9% versus 18.8%; adjusted OR, 4.34; [95% CI 0.34–54.83]; P =0.25), were not significantly different. 94.7% of patients treated with EVT achieved successful reperfusion (modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 2b–3). In routine clinical practice, EVT beyond 24 hours from LKW appears safe and feasible, when performed in patients with acute ischemic stroke who were deemed eligible for EVT by noncontrast CT /CT angiography alone. A large collaborative randomized trial assessing the efficacy of EVT beyond 24 hours is warranted. Our findings provide a basis for the sample size estimate for an adequately powered trial.
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
血管内血栓切除术与大血管闭塞引起的急性缺血性卒中24小时后的最佳医疗管理
血管内血栓切除术(EVT)治疗因大血管闭塞导致的急性缺血性卒中患者的安全性和有效性尚不确定。在这项单中心研究中,我们根据阿尔伯塔省卒中项目早期CT评分≥5,美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表≥6,并在LKW后24小时内出现的非扫描计算机断层扫描(CT)/CT血管造影术(无CT灌注或磁共振成像),确定了符合EVT条件的大血管闭塞患者,2018年1月至2022年3月。在研究期间,EVT服务限制意味着有资格在服务时间外接受EVT的患者通常接受最佳医疗管理(BMM)。在对年龄、基线卒中严重程度、艾伯塔省卒中项目早期CT评分、LKW时间、静脉溶栓和血栓位置进行多变量调整后,比较接受EVT或BMM的患者的功能和安全性结果。在35名从LKW出现超过24小时并符合EVT条件的患者中,19名(54%)接受了EVT治疗,16名(46%)接受了BMM治疗。阿尔伯塔省卒中项目早期CT评分在两组中相似(EVT:7[6.75-8]与BMM:7[6-8]),但不是美国国立卫生研究院的基线卒中量表(EVT:17[11-19.5]与BMM:20[9.75-26])。EVT和BMM组在症状性颅内出血率(5.3%与0%;P=0.28)或死亡率(26.3%与37.5%;P=0.42)方面没有观察到显著差异。90天时的改良Rankin量表(调整后的共同优势比[OR],1.94;[95%CI 0.42–8.87];P=0.39)和功能独立率,尽管EVT组在数字上高于BMM组(改良Rankin表≤2;36.9%对18.8%;调整后的OR,4.34;[95%CI 0.34–54.83];P=0.25),没有显著差异。94.7%接受EVT治疗的患者成功再灌注(改良脑梗死溶栓2b–3)。在常规临床实践中,当对急性缺血性卒中患者进行EVT时,从LKW开始超过24小时的EVT似乎是安全可行的,这些患者被认为有资格单独通过非扫描CT/CT血管造影术进行EVT。有必要进行一项大型随机合作试验,评估EVT在24小时后的疗效。我们的发现为充分有力的试验的样本量估计提供了基础。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Endovascular Therapy Effectiveness for Unruptured Saccular Intracranial Aneurysms. Large, Wide-Neck, Side-Wall Aneurysm Treatment in Canines Using NeuroCURE: A Novel Liquid Embolic. Proceedings of the Seventh Annual CLOTS Meeting: CLOTS 7.0, Madrid, Spain Catching Up With Time: Endovascular Treatment Beyond 24 Hours Can Aneurysm Wall Radiomics Help Predict Rupture Risk?
×
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