T. Q. Nguyen, A. L. T. Truong, H. Phan, D. Nguyen, K. Nguyen, Huong Nguyen, A. Nguyen, Dinh Chau Bao Hoang, Vu Thanh Tran, T. Q. Nguyen, Tracey Le, K. Nguyen, T. H. Nguyen
{"title":"Bridging Therapy and Direct Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Prospective Cohort Study","authors":"T. Q. Nguyen, A. L. T. Truong, H. Phan, D. Nguyen, K. Nguyen, Huong Nguyen, A. Nguyen, Dinh Chau Bao Hoang, Vu Thanh Tran, T. Q. Nguyen, Tracey Le, K. Nguyen, T. H. Nguyen","doi":"10.1177/2516608520976275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: It remains controversial if intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) prior to mechanical thrombectomy (MTE) is superior to MTE alone in patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion. We aim to compare functional outcomes, mortality, reperfusion, and intracranial hemorrhage rates in bridging therapy (IVT prior thrombectomy) and MTE alone groups within 6 h from symptom onset. Materials and Methods: Consecutive hospitalized patients (September 2017 and July 2018) with acute large artery occlusion within the anterior cerebral circulation eligible for MTE with or without prior IVT were included. A modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2 was considered as good functional outcome at 90 days. Successful reperfusion was defined as a Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction scale of 2b to 3. Results: Of the 124 patients included, 56 (45.2%) received bridging therapy and 68 (54.8%) received MTE alone. Patients receiving bridging therapy were younger (median, 56 vs 63, P = .045) and had shorter onset-to-groin time (median, 270 vs 370 min, P < .001) than those receiving MTE alone. Successful reperfusion rate was significantly greater in the bridging therapy group (87.5% vs 72.1%, P = 0.03). There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups in functional independence (bridging 58.9% vs 75.0%, P = 0.07), mortality at 90 days (bridging 14.3% vs 7.4%, P = 0.22), parenchymal hematoma type 2 (bridging 3.6% vs 2.9%, P > .99), and any hemorrhage (bridging 42.3% vs 26.5%, P = 0.07). Conclusion: Compared to MTE alone, bridging therapy with IVT improved the reperfusion rate but not other outcomes. Further clinical trials are needed to confirm our findings.","PeriodicalId":93323,"journal":{"name":"Journal of stroke medicine","volume":"63 1","pages":"124 - 130"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of stroke medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2516608520976275","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Background: It remains controversial if intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) prior to mechanical thrombectomy (MTE) is superior to MTE alone in patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion. We aim to compare functional outcomes, mortality, reperfusion, and intracranial hemorrhage rates in bridging therapy (IVT prior thrombectomy) and MTE alone groups within 6 h from symptom onset. Materials and Methods: Consecutive hospitalized patients (September 2017 and July 2018) with acute large artery occlusion within the anterior cerebral circulation eligible for MTE with or without prior IVT were included. A modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2 was considered as good functional outcome at 90 days. Successful reperfusion was defined as a Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction scale of 2b to 3. Results: Of the 124 patients included, 56 (45.2%) received bridging therapy and 68 (54.8%) received MTE alone. Patients receiving bridging therapy were younger (median, 56 vs 63, P = .045) and had shorter onset-to-groin time (median, 270 vs 370 min, P < .001) than those receiving MTE alone. Successful reperfusion rate was significantly greater in the bridging therapy group (87.5% vs 72.1%, P = 0.03). There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups in functional independence (bridging 58.9% vs 75.0%, P = 0.07), mortality at 90 days (bridging 14.3% vs 7.4%, P = 0.22), parenchymal hematoma type 2 (bridging 3.6% vs 2.9%, P > .99), and any hemorrhage (bridging 42.3% vs 26.5%, P = 0.07). Conclusion: Compared to MTE alone, bridging therapy with IVT improved the reperfusion rate but not other outcomes. Further clinical trials are needed to confirm our findings.
背景:对于大血管闭塞引起的急性缺血性卒中患者,在机械取栓(MTE)前静脉溶栓(IVT)是否优于单纯机械取栓(MTE)仍存在争议。我们的目标是在症状出现后6小时内比较桥接治疗组(IVT前取栓)和单独MTE组的功能结局、死亡率、再灌注和颅内出血率。材料与方法:纳入2017年9月至2018年7月连续住院的脑前循环急性大动脉闭塞患者,合并或不合并IVT,符合MTE治疗条件。修改后的Rankin量表评分0到2分被认为是90天的良好功能结局。再灌注成功定义为脑梗死溶栓评分2b ~ 3。结果:124例患者中,56例(45.2%)接受桥接治疗,68例(54.8%)单独接受MTE治疗。接受桥接治疗的患者更年轻(中位数,56 vs 63, P = 0.045),与单独接受MTE治疗的患者相比,从发病到腹股沟的时间更短(中位数,270 vs 370分钟,P < 0.001)。桥接治疗组再灌注成功率显著高于桥接治疗组(87.5% vs 72.1%, P = 0.03)。两组患者在功能独立性(桥接58.9% vs 75.0%, P = 0.07)、90天死亡率(桥接14.3% vs 7.4%, P = 0.22)、2型实质血肿(桥接3.6% vs 2.9%, P > 0.99)和任何出血(桥接42.3% vs 26.5%, P = 0.07)方面均无统计学差异。结论:与单纯MTE治疗相比,桥接与IVT治疗提高了再灌注率,但没有改善其他结果。需要进一步的临床试验来证实我们的发现。