Effect of Endovascular Treatment Alone vs Intravenous Alteplase Plus Endovascular Treatment on Functional Independence in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: The DEVT Randomized Clinical Trial

Direct versus Bridging Mechanical Thrombectomy in Elderly Patients with Acute Large Vessel Occlusion: A Multicenter Cohort Study

Purpose

Elderly people represent a growing stroke population with different pathophysiological states than younger. Whether intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) before mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is beneficial for elderly patients remains unclear. This study compared the efficacy and safety between elderly patients treated with MT alone and those treated with both IVT and MT.

Patients and Methods

Patients aged ≥65 years who were eligible for IVT within 4.5 h from symptom onset were selected from the ANGEL-ACT (Endovascular Treatment Key Technique and Emergency Work Flow Improvement of Acute Ischemic Stroke) registry, a prospective registry program for patients with endovascular treatment from 111 Chinese stroke centers. The primary efficacy outcome was the 90-day modified Rankin Scale score. We compared efficacy and safety outcomes using ordinal or binary logistic regression or a generalized linear model.

Results

In total, 482 elderly patients were included: 187 (38.8%) received IVT and MT (bridging MT) and 295 (61.2%) received MT alone (direct MT). There was no significant difference in the 90-day modified Rankin Scale score between the two groups (median: 4 vs 4 points, respectively; adjusted β=−0.048, P=0.822). The direct MT group had a shorter onset-to-puncture time (225 vs 255 min, respectively; adjusted β=−55.074, P=0.002) and a lower rate of parenchymal hemorrhage type 2 within 24 h (2.80% vs 6.63%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio [OR]=0.287, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.096–0.856, P=0.025). In addition, the direct MT group showed a trend toward a lower incidence of sICH (5.67% vs 10.06%, adjusted OR=0.453, P=0.061), procedure-related complications (7.12% vs 12.30%, adjusted OR=0.499, P=0.052) and distal or new territorial embolization (4.07% vs 6.95%, adjusted OR=0.450, P=0.093).

Conclusion

Direct MT had similar efficacy to bridging MT in terms of the 90-day functional outcome in elderly patients, whereas bridging MT had a longer onset-to-puncture time and increased risk of hemorrhagic transformation and procedure-related complications.

Thrombolytic strategies for ischemic stroke in the thrombectomy era

Twenty-five years ago, intravenous thrombolysis has revolutionized the care of patients with acute ischemic stroke. Since 2015, randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that mechanical thrombectomy improves functional outcome in stroke patients over intravenous thrombolysis alone. More recently, three randomized clinical trials have suggested that mechanical thrombectomy alone is noninferior to a combined strategy with both intravenous thrombolysis and mechanical thrombectomy. In the present review, we will present the last clinical and preclinical studies on the use of thrombolysis in stroke patients in the modern thrombectomy era. At the cost of a potential increased risk of hemorrhagic transformation, thrombolysis may promote arterial recanalization before thrombectomy, improve the rate of successful recanalization after thrombectomy, and restore microcirculation patency downstream of the main thrombus. Besides, new thrombolytic strategies targeting tissue-type plasminogen activator resistant thrombi are being developed, which could strengthen the beneficial effects of thrombolysis without carrying additional pro-hemorrhagic effects. For instance, tenecteplase has shown improved rate of recanalization compared with tissue-type plasminogen activator (alteplase). Beyond fibrinolysis, DNA- and von Willebrand factor-targeted thrombolytic strategies have shown promising results in experimental models of ischemic stroke. New combined strategies, improved thrombolytics, and dedicated clinical trials in selected patients are eagerly awaited to further improve functional outcome in stroke.

Direct thrombectomy versus bridging thrombolysis with mechanical thrombectomy in middle cerebral artery stroke: a real-world analysis through National Inpatient Sample data

OBJECTIVE

A paradigm shift in the management of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to large-vessel occlusion (LVO) occurred after 2015 when 7 randomized controlled trials demonstrated better outcomes using second-generation thrombectomy devices combined with best medical management than did stand-alone intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with tissue plasminogen activator (tPA). All recently published landmark trials were designed to study the outcome of mechanical thrombectomy (MT); therefore, the majority of the patients enrolled in these trials received intravenous tPA. Currently, initiating IVT before MT is a matter of debate. Recent trials (DIRECT-MT, DEVT) exploring this clinical question showed noninferiority of MT alone compared with the combined treatment. With this uncertainty, the authors aimed to explore real-world data through the latest National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to compare the safety and outcomes of MT alone with bridging IVT and MT in AIS due to LVO in the middle cerebral artery (MCA).

METHODS

NIS data from 2017 to 2018 were analyzed to compare the outcomes and safety profiles of patients who underwent MT+IVT with those who underwent MT alone.

RESULTS

A total of 2895 patients were included in the final analysis (MT, n = 1669; MT+IVT, n = 1226). The mean National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 16.2 (SD 6.1) in the MT group and 16.6 (SD 5.97) in the MT+IVT group (p = 0.04). With respect to comorbidities, the two groups did not differ in rates of hypertension (p = 0.730), atrial fibrillation/flutter (p = 0.828), and smoking status (p = 0.914). The rate of diabetes mellitus was significantly higher in the MT group (28%) than in the MT+IVT group (22.1%) (p < 0.001). The frequency of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) in the MT group was 17.7% (n = 296) and 21.5% (n = 263) in the MT+IVT group (p = 0.012). Intraventricular hemorrhage (p = 0.875), subarachnoid hemorrhage (p = 0.99), and vasospasm (p = 0.976) did not differ significantly between the groups. The primary outcome considered was disability status between the groups; 23.8% of patients in the MT+IVT group had minimal disability versus 18.2% in the MT group (p = 0.001). The risk of progressing to severe disability from minimal disability decreased with the addition of IVT to MT (OR 0.762, 95% CI 0.637-0.912). The adjusted odds ratio for ICH in the MT+IVT group was 1.28 (95% CI 1.043-1.571, p = 0.018) and 2.676 (95% CI 1.259-5.686, p = 0.01) for access-site hemorrhages.

CONCLUSIONS

In the analysis of the NIS database, the MT+IVT group had significantly higher rates of minimal disability at the time of hospital discharge versus the MT-alone group, despite a higher rate of ICH. The question of whether to treat patients with MT+IVT rather than MT alone is currently being addressed in ongoing prospective clinical trials (SWIFT-DIRECT [NCT03494920], MR CLEAN-NO IV [ISRCTN80619088], and DIRECT-SAFE [NCT03494920]). The results of these studies will contribute to greater understanding and progressive improvement in outcomes for AIS patients.

Is concurrent intravenous alteplase in patients undergoing endovascular treatment for large vessel occlusion stroke cost-effective even if the cost of alteplase is only US$1?

BACKGROUND

The added value of intravenous (IV) alteplase in large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke over and beyond endovascular treatment (EVT) is controversial. We compared the long-term costs and cost-effectiveness of a direct-to-EVT paradigm in LVO stroke patients presenting directly to the mothership hospital to concurrent EVT and IV alteplase.

METHODS

We used a decision model consisting of a short-run model to analyze costs and functional outcomes within 90 days after the index stroke and a long-run Markov state transition model (cycle length of 12 months) to estimate expected lifetime costs and outcomes. Outcome data were from the DIRECT-MT trial (NCT03469206). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and net monetary benefits were calculated and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Analysis was performed from a healthcare perspective and a societal perspective using both a minimal assumed alteplase cost of US$1 and true alteplase cost.

RESULTS

When assuming a minimal cost of alteplase of $1, EVT with concurrent IV alteplase resulted in incremental lifetime cost of $5664 (healthcare perspective)/$4804 (societal perspective) and a decrement of 0.25 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with EVT only, indicating dominance of the EVT only approach. Net monetary benefits were consistently higher for EVT only compared with EVT with concurrent alteplase. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed increased costs without an increase in QALYs for EVT and concurrent IV alteplase compared with EVT only. Results were even more in favor of EVT when the true cost of alteplase was used for analysis.

CONCLUSION

EVT without concurrent alteplase is the preferred strategy from a health economic standpoint.

Utility of Intravenous Alteplase Prior to Endovascular Stroke Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of RCTs

OBJECTIVE

To provide a critical appraisal on the evidence from randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) on the utility of direct endovascular treatment (dEVT) compared to the combination of endovascular treatment preceded by IV thrombolysis (bridging therapy [BT]) for patients with acute large vessel occlusion (LVO).

METHODS

Eligible RCTs were identified by searching Medline and Scopus. We calculated the corresponding odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and pooled estimates using random-effects models. The primary outcome was the probability of modified Rankin scale (mRS) score of 0 to 2 at 3 months.

RESULTS

We included 3 studies comprising 1,092 patients. No difference between the dEVT and BT groups was detected for the outcomes of mRS score of 0 to 2 (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.85-1.38; adjusted OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.76-1.63), mRS score of 0 to 1 (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.84-1.43; adjusted OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.84-1.61), and functional improvement at 3 months (common OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.88-1.34; adjusted common OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.86-1.37). Patients receiving dEVT had significantly lower likelihood of successful recanalization before the endovascular procedure compared to those receiving BT (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.18-0.77). Patients receiving dEVT had lower intracranial bleeding rates compared to those receiving BT (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.92) but without a significant difference in the probability of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. No differences in all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, or procedural complications between the 2 groups were uncovered.

CONCLUSIONS

We detected no differences in functional outcomes of IV thrombolysis-eligible patients with an acute LVO receiving dEVT compared to BT. Because uncertainty for most endpoints remains large and the available data are not able to exclude the possibility of overall benefit or harm, further RCTs are needed.

Controversies in Imaging of Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

The development of reperfusion therapies has profoundly impacted stroke care, initially with the advent of IV thrombolytic (IVT) treatment and, more recently, with the development and refinement of endovascular treatment (EVT). Progress in neuroimaging has supported the paradigm shift of stroke care, and advanced neuroimaging now has a fundamental role in triaging patients for both IVT and EVT. As the standard of care for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) evolves, controversies remain in certain clinical scenarios. This article explores the use of multimodality imaging for treatment selection of AIS in the context of recent guidelines, highlighting controversial topics and providing guidance for clinical practice. Results of major randomized trials supporting EVT are reviewed. Advantages and disadvantages of CT, CTA, MRI, and MRA in stroke diagnosis are summarized, with attention to level 1 evidence supporting the role of vascular imaging and perfusion imaging. Patient selection is compared between approaches based on time thresholds and physiologic approaches based on infarct core measurement using imaging. Moreover, various imaging approaches to core measurement are described. As ongoing studies push treatment boundaries, advanced imaging is expected to help identify a widening range of patients who may benefit from therapy.

Clinical and Neuroimaging Outcomes of Direct Thrombectomy vs Bridging Therapy in Large Vessel Occlusion: Analysis of the SELECT Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the comparative safety and efficacy of direct endovascular thrombectomy (dEVT) compared to bridging therapy (BT; IV tissue plasminogen activator + EVT) and to assess whether BT potential benefit relates to stroke severity, size, and initial presentation to EVT vs non-EVT center.

METHODS

In a prospective multicenter cohort study of imaging selection for endovascular thrombectomy (Optimizing Patient Selection for Endovascular Treatment in Acute Ischemic Stroke [SELECT]), patients with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion (LVO) presenting to EVT-capable centers within 4.5 hours from last known well were stratified into BT vs dEVT. The primary outcome was 90-day functional independence (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score 0-2). Secondary outcomes included a shift across 90-day mRS grades, mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. We also performed subgroup analyses according to initial presentation to EVT-capable center (direct vs transfer), stroke severity, and baseline infarct core volume.

RESULTS

We identified 226 LVOs (54% men, mean age 65.6 ± 14.6 years, median NIH Stroke Scale [NIHSS] score 17, 28% received dEVT). Median time from arrival to groin puncture did not differ in patients with BT when presenting directly (dEVT 1.43 [interquartile range (IQR) 1.13-1.90] hours vs BT 1.58 [IQR 1.27-2.02] hours, p = 0.40) or transferred to EVT-capable centers (dEVT 1.17 [IQR 0.90-1.48] hours vs BT 1.27 [IQR 0.97-1.87] hours, p = 0.24). BT was associated with higher odds of 90-day functional independence (57% vs 44%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-4.03, p = 0.046) and functional improvement (adjusted common OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.18-3.60, p = 0.011) and lower likelihood of 90-day mortality (11% vs 23%, aOR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07-0.58, p = 0.003). No differences in any other outcomes were detected. In subgroup analyses, patients with BT with baseline NIHSS scores <15 had higher functional independence likelihood compared to those with dEVT (aOR 4.87, 95% CI 1.56-15.18, p = 0.006); this association was not evident for patients with NIHSS scores ≥15 (aOR 1.05, 95% CI 0.40-2.74, p = 0.92). Similarly, functional outcomes improvements with BT were detected in patients with core volume strata (ischemic core <50 cm3: aOR 2.10, 95% CI 1.02-4.33, p = 0.044 vs ischemic core ≥50 cm3: aOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.01-16.02, p = 0.64) and transfer status (transferred: aOR 2.21, 95% CI 0.93-9.65, p = 0.29 vs direct to EVT center: aOR 1.84, 95% CI 0.80-4.23, p = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

BT appears to be associated with better clinical outcomes, especially with milder NIHSS scores, smaller presentation core volumes, and those who were "dripped and shipped." We did not observe any potential benefit of BT in patients with more severe strokes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02446587.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class III evidence that for patients with ischemic stroke from anterior circulation LVO within 4.5 hours from last known well, BT compared to dEVT leads to better 90-day functional outcomes.

Clinical imaging factors of excellent outcome after thrombolysis in large-vessel stroke: a THRACE subgroup analysis

Background

For patients with stroke with large-vessel occlusion (LVO), study of factors predicting response to intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) would allow identifying subgroups with high expected gain, and those for whom it could be considered as futile, and even detrimental. From patients included in the Mechanical Thrombectomy After Intravenous Alteplase vs Alteplase Alone After Stroke trial, we investigated clinical-imaging factors associated with optimal response to IVT.

Methods

We included patients receiving IVT alone. Excellent outcome was defined by a 3-month modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ≤1. Clinical-imaging predictors were assessed on multivariate analysis after multiple imputations. The predictive performance of the model was assessed with the C-statistic.

Results

Among 247 patients with LVO treated with IVT alone, 77 (31%) showed 3-month mRS ≤1. Predictors of 3-month mRS ≤1 were no medical history of hypertension (OR 2.43; 95% CI 1.74 to 3.38; p=0.007); no current smoking (OR 2.76; 95% CI 1.79 to 4.26; p=0.02); onset-to-IVT time (OR 0.47 per hour increase; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.78; p=0.003); diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) volume (OR 0.78 per 10 mL increase; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.89; p=0.0004); presence of susceptibility vessel sign (SVS) (OR 7.89; 95% CI 1.65 to 37.78; p=0.01) and SVS length (OR 0.87 per mm increase; 95% CI 0.80 to 0.94; p=0.001). The prediction models showed a C-statistic=0.79 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.80).

Conclusions

In patients with stroke with anterior-circulation LVO treated with IVT alone, predictors of excellent outcome at 3 months were no medical history of hypertension or current smoking, reduced onset-to-IVT time, small DWI volume, presence of SVS and short SVS length. These predictive factors could help practitioners in decision-making for IVT implementation in reperfusion strategies, all the more for the drip and ship paradigm.

Trial registration number

NCT01062698.

Safety and Outcomes of Thrombectomy in Ischemic Stroke With vs Without IV Thrombolysis

OBJECTIVE

To test the hypothesis that IV thrombolysis (IVT) treatment before endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is associated with better outcomes in patients with anterior circulation large artery occlusion (LAO) stroke, we examined a large real-world database, the Safe Implementation of Treatment in Stroke-International Stroke Thrombectomy Register (SITS-ISTR).

METHODS

We identified centers recording ≥10 consecutive patients in the SITS-ISTR, with at least 70% available modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores at 3 months during 2014 to 2019. We defined LAO as intracranial internal carotid artery, first and second segment of middle cerebral artery, and first segment of anterior cerebral artery. Main outcomes were functional independence (mRS score 0-2) and death at 3 months and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH) per modified SITS-Monitoring Study. We performed propensity score-matched (PSM) and multivariable logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of 6,350 patients from 42 centers, 3,944 (62.1%) received IVT. IVT + EVT-treated patients had less frequent atrial fibrillation, ongoing anticoagulation, previous stroke, heart failure, and prestroke disability. PSM analysis showed that IVT + EVT-treated patients had a higher rate of functional independence than patients treated with EVT alone (46.4% vs 40.3%, p < 0.001) and a lower rate of death at 3 months (20.3% vs 23.3%, p = 0.035). SICH rates (3.5% vs 3.0%, p = 0.42) were similar in both groups. Multivariate adjustment yielded results consistent with PSM.

CONCLUSION

Pretreatment with IVT was associated with favorable outcomes in EVT-treated LAO stroke in the SITS-ISTR. These findings, while indicative of international routine clinical practice, are limited by observational design, unmeasured confounding, and possible residual confounding by indication.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class II evidence that IVT before EVT increases the probability of functional independence at 3 months compared to EVT alone.

Direct mechanical thrombectomy without intravenous thrombolysis versus bridging therapy for acute ischemic stroke: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Direct mechanical thrombectomy may result in similar outcomes compared to a bridging approach with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT + MT) in acute ischemic stroke. Recent randomized controlled trials have varied in their design and noninferiority margin.

AIM

We sought to meta-analyze accumulated trial data to assess the difference and non-inferiority in clinical and procedural outcomes between direct mechanical thrombectomy and bridging therapy.

SUMMARY OF REVIEW

We conducted a systematic review of electronic databases following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted for the pooled data. The primary outcome was good functional outcome at 90 days (modified Rankin scale (mRS) ≤ 2). Secondary outcomes included excellent functional outcome (mRS ≤ 1), mortality, any intracranial hemorrhage, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, successful reperfusion (thrombolysis in cerebral infarction ≥ 2 b), and procedure-related complications. Four randomized controlled trials comprising 1633 patients (817 direct mechanical thrombectomy, 816 bridging therapy) were included. There were no statistical differences for the 90-day good functional outcome (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.84-1.25, p = 0.54, I²= 0%), and the absolute risk difference was 1% (95% CI: -4% to 5%). The lower 95% CI falls within the strictest noninferiority margin of -10% among included randomized control trials. Direct mechanical thrombectomy reduced the odds of successful reperfusion (OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.60-0.97, p = 0.03, I²= 0%) and any intracranial hemorrhage (OR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.49-0.86, p = 0.003, I²= 38%). There was no difference in the remaining secondary outcomes. The risk of bias for all studies was low.

CONCLUSION

The combined trial data assessing direct mechanical thrombectomy versus bridging therapy showed no difference in improving good functional outcome. The wide noninferiority thresholds set by individual trials are in contrast with the clinical consensus on minimally important differences. However, our pooled analysis indicates noninferiority of direct mechanical thrombectomy with a 4% margin of confidence. The application of these findings is limited to patients presenting directly to mechanical thrombectomy-capable centers and real-world workflow times may differ against those achieved in a trial setting.

Acute reperfusion therapies for acute ischemic stroke patients with unknown time of symptom onset or in extended time windows: an individualized approach

Recent randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have revolutionized acute ischemic stroke care by extending the use of intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular reperfusion therapies in time windows that have been originally considered futile or even unsafe. Both systemic and endovascular reperfusion therapies have been shown to improve outcome in patients with wake-up strokes or symptom onset beyond 4.5 h for intravenous thrombolysis and beyond 6 h for endovascular treatment; however, they require advanced neuroimaging to select stroke patients safely. Experts have proposed simpler imaging algorithms but high-quality data on safety and efficacy are currently missing. RCTs used diverse imaging and clinical inclusion criteria for patient selection during the dawn of this novel stroke treatment paradigm. After taking into consideration the dismal prognosis of nonrecanalized ischemic stroke patients and the substantial clinical benefit of reperfusion therapies in selected late presenters, we propose rescue reperfusion therapies for acute ischemic stroke patients not fulfilling all clinical and imaging inclusion criteria as an option in a subgroup of patients with clinical and radiological profiles suggesting low risk for complications, notably hemorrhagic transformation as well as local or remote parenchymal hemorrhage. Incorporating new data to treatment algorithms may seem perplexing to stroke physicians, since treatment and imaging capabilities of each stroke center may dictate diverse treatment pathways. This narrative review will summarize current data that will assist clinicians in the selection of those late presenters that will most likely benefit from acute reperfusion therapies. Different treatment algorithms are provided according to available neuroimaging and endovascular treatment capabilities.

Outcomes in young adults with acute ischemic stroke undergoing endovascular thrombectomy: A real-world multicenter experience

Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is the standard of care for anterior circulation acute ischemic stroke (AIS) with large vessel occlusion (LVO). Young patients with AIS-LVO have distinctly different underlying stroke mechanisms and etiologies. Much is unknown about the safety and efficacy of EVT in this population of young AIS-LVO patients. All consecutive AIS-LVO patients aged 50 years and below were included in this multicenter cohort study. The primary outcome measured was functional recovery at 90 days, with modified Rankin Scale of 0-2 deemed as good functional outcome. A total of 275 AIS-LVO patients that underwent EVT from 10 tertiary centers in Germany, Sweden, Singapore, and Taiwan were included. Successful reperfusion was achieved in 85.1% (234/275). Good functional outcomes were achieved in 66.0% (182/275). Arterial dissection was the most prevalent stroke etiology (42/195, 21.5%). National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score at presentation was inversely related to good functional outcomes (aOR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.88-0.96 per point increase, p < 0.001). Successful reperfusion (aOR: 3.22, 95% CI: 1.44-7.21, p = 0.005), higher ASPECTS (aOR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.01-1.44, p = 0.036), and bridging intravenous thrombolysis (aOR: 2.37, 95% CI: 1.29-4.34, p = 0.005) independently predicted good functional outcomes. Successful reperfusion was inversely associated with in-hospital mortality (aOR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.03-0.57, p = 0.006). History of hypertension strongly predicted in-hospital mortality (aOR: 4.59, 95% CI: 1.10-19.13, p = 0.036). While differences in functional outcomes exist across varying stroke aetiologies, high rates of successful reperfusion and good outcomes are generally achieved in young AIS-LVO patients undergoing EVT.

New Approaches in Nanomedicine for Ischemic Stroke

Ischemic stroke, caused by the interruption of blood flow to the brain and subsequent neuronal death, represents one of the main causes of disability in developed countries. Therapeutic methods such as recanalization approaches, neuroprotective drugs, or recovery strategies have been widely developed to improve the patient's outcome; however, important limitations such as a narrow therapeutic window, the ability to reach brain targets, or drug side effects constitute some of the main aspects that limit the clinical applicability of the current treatments. Nanotechnology has emerged as a promising tool to overcome many of these drug limitations and improve the efficacy of treatments for neurological diseases such as stroke. The use of nanoparticles as a contrast agent or as drug carriers to a specific target are some of the most common approaches developed in nanomedicine for stroke. Throughout this review, we have summarized our experience of using nanotechnology tools for the study of stroke and the search for novel therapies.

Acute revascularization in ischemic stroke: Updated Swiss guidelines

In acute ischemic stroke, intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and acute endovascular therapy (EVT) have been shown to reduce long-term disability in randomized trials. International guidelines are partially not up to date and may not address situations for which there is limited scientific evidence. The goals of the present guidelines are to summarize the current scientific data for acute revascularization treatments to make sure that all Swiss Centers apply a similar, evidence, or consensus-based treatment standard. A multidisciplinary working group of the Swiss Stroke Society (SSS) searched and reviewed the literature on new randomized controlled trials (RCTs), large case series, meta-analyses, and other guidelines since the previous recommendations in 2009 to elaborate the consensus guidelines. The new RCTs have confirmed the effectiveness of IVT in various populations up to 4.5 h and proven the benefit of acute EVT up to approximately 8 h. For patients with unknown onset (including wake-up stroke), IVT and EVT can be effective up to 24 h after last proof of good health if patients are selected with advanced neuroimaging. Multiple case series and meta-analyses allow narrowing down the indications and relative and absolute contraindications to optimize the benefit–risk ratio of acute revascularization.

Comparison of Prior Bridging Intravenous Thrombolysis With Direct Endovascular Thrombectomy for Anterior Circulation Large Vessel Occlusion: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Whether bridging treatment combining intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is superior to direct EVT alone for emergent large vessel occlusion (LVO) in the anterior circulation is unknown. A systematic review and a meta-analysis were performed to investigate and assess the effect and safety of bridging treatment vs. direct EVT in patients with LVO in the anterior circulation.

Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library were searched to assess the effect and safety of bridging treatment and direct EVT in LVO. Functional independence, mortality, asymptomatic and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (aICH and sICH, respectively), and successful recanalization were evaluated. The risk ratio and the 95% CI were analyzed.

Results: Among the eight studies included, there was no significant difference in the long-term functional independence (OR = 1.008, 95% CI = 0.845–1.204, P = 0.926), mortality (OR = 1.060, 95% CI = 0.840–1.336, P = 0.624), recanalization rate (OR = 1.015, 95% CI = 0.793–1.300, P = 0.905), and the incidence of sICH (OR = 1.320, 95% CI = 0.931–1.870, P = 0.119) between bridging therapy and direct EVT. After adjusting for confounding factors, bridging therapy showed a lower recanalization rate (effect size or ES = −0.377, 95% CI = −0.684 to −0.070, P = 0.016), but there was no significant difference in the long-term functional independence (ES = 0.057, 95% CI = −0.177 to 0.291, P = 0.634), mortality (ES = 0.693, 95% CI = −0.133 to 1.519, P = 0.100), and incidence of sICH (ES = −0.051, 95% CI = −0.687 to 0.585, P = 0.875) compared with direct EVT. Meanwhile, in the subgroup analysis of RCT, no significant difference was found in the long-term functional independence (OR = 0.927, 95% CI = 0.727–1.182, P = 0.539), recanalization rate (OR = 1.331, 95% CI = 0.948–1.867, P = 0.099), mortality (OR = 1.072, 95% CI = 0.776–1.481, P = 0.673), and sICH incidence (OR = 1.383, 95% CI = 0.806–2.374, P = 0.977) between patients receiving bridging therapy and those receiving direct DVT.

Conclusion: For stroke patients with acute anterior circulation occlusion and who are eligible for intravenous thrombolysis, there is no significant difference in the clinical effect between direct EVT and bridging therapy, which needs to be verified by more randomized controlled trials.

Endovascular therapy with or without intravenous thrombolysis in acute stroke with tandem occlusion

BACKGROUND

Endovascular therapy (EVT) is effective and safe in patients with tandem occlusion. The benefit of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) prior to EVT in acute tandem occlusion is debatable.

OBJECTIVE

To compare EVT alone with EVT plus IVT in patients with acute ischemic stroke due to anterior circulation tandem occlusions.

METHODS

This is an individual patient pooled analysis of the Thrombectomy In TANdem lesions (TITAN) and Endovascular Treatment in Ischemic Stroke (ETIS) Registries. Patients were divided into two groups based on prior IVT treatment: (1) IVT+ group, which included patients who received IVT prior to EVT, (2) IVT- group, which included patients who did not receive IVT prior to EVT. Propensity score (inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)) was used to reduce baseline between-group differences. The primary outcome was favorable outcome-that is, modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 0 to 2 at 90 days.

RESULTS

Overall, 602 consecutive patients with an acute stroke with tandem occlusion were included (380 and 222 in the bridging therapy and EVT alone groups, respectively). Onset to imaging time was shorter in the IVT+ group (median 103 vs 140 min). In contrast, imaging to puncture time was longer in the IVT+ group (median 107 vs 91 min). In IPTW analysis, the IVT+ group had higher odds of favorable outcome, excellent outcome (90-day mRS score 0-1), and successful reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score 2b/3 at the end of EVT). There was no difference in the risk of significant hemorrhagic complications between groups. In secondary analysis of patients treated with acute cervical internal carotid artery stenting, bridging therapy was associated with higher odds of favorable outcome and lower odds of mortality at 90 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that bridging therapy in patients with acute ischemic stroke due to anterior tandem occlusion is safe and may improve functional outcome, even in the setting of acute cervical internal carotid artery stenting during EVT.

Low-Dose vs. Standard-Dose Intravenous Alteplase in Bridging Therapy Among Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: Experience From a Stroke Center in Vietnam

Background: To date, the role of bridging intravenous thrombolysis before mechanical thrombectomy (MTE) is controversial but still recommended in eligible patients. Different doses of intravenous alteplase have been used for treating patients with acute ischemic stroke from large-vessel occlusion (LVO-AIS) in Asia, largely due to variations in the risks for intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and treatment affordability. Uncertainty exists over the potential benefits of treating low-dose alteplase, as opposed to standard-dose alteplase, prior to MTE among patients with LVO-AIS. Aim: The aim of the study was to compare outcomes of low- vs. standard-dose of bridging intravenous alteplase before MTE among LVO-AIS patients. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of LVO-AIS patients who were treated with either 0.6 mg/kg or 0.9 mg/kg alteplase prior to MTE at a stroke center in Northern Vietnam. Multivariable logistic regression models, accounting for potential confounding factors including comorbidities and clinical factors (e.g., stroke severity), were used to compare the outcomes between the two groups. Our primary outcome was functional independence at 90 days following stroke (modified Rankin score; mRS ≤ 2). Secondary outcomes included any ICH incidence, early neurological improvement, recanalization rate, and 90-day mortality. Results: We analyzed data of 107 patients receiving bridging therapy, including 73 with low-dose and 34 with standard-dose alteplase before MTE. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in functional independence at 90 days (adjusted OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.29-3.52) after accounting for potential confounding factors. Compared to the standard-dose group, patients with low-dose alteplase before MTE had similar rates of successful recanalization, early neurological improvement, 90-day mortality, and ICH complications. Conclusion: In the present study, patients with low-dose alteplase before MTE were found to achieve comparable clinical outcomes compared to those receiving standard-dose alteplase bridging with MTE. The findings suggest potential benefits of low-dose alteplase in bridging therapy for Asian populations, but this needs to be confirmed by further clinical trials.