Recanalization after Extracranial Dissection: Effect of Antiplatelet Compared with Anticoagulant Therapy

Medical and interventional outcome of dissection of the cervical arteries: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The management of cervical artery dissections (CADs) is poorly standardized given the scarce number of prospective studies comparing medical and interventional approach to CAD. The aim of the present study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the treatments of CAD.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis (pre-registered on PROSPERO [CRD42022297512] are performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses [PRISMA] guidelines searching in three different databases [PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Database]) of studies on medical or interventional approach to CAD. Only prospective studies were selected to reduce the risk of bias for the primary meta-analysis. Secondarily, retrospective studies were also included. The aim was to assess the rate of stroke and of stroke/death/bleeding (major or intracranial) by Der Simonian-Laird weights of random effects model.

RESULTS

After screening 456 articles, 6 prospective and 22 retrospective studies were identified. Two randomized controlled trials and five retrospective studies comparing antiplatelet (APT) vs oral anticoagulant therapy (OAC) for CAD were identified, as well as four prospective and 17 retrospective single-arm studies evaluating stenting for CAD. In the meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing APT vs OAC, 444 patients were considered, and a borderline significant association was identified in terms of stroke/death in the APT vs OAC groups (odds ratio [OR], 5.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-33.38; P = .06; I2 = 0%). No differences were found for the stroke/death/bleeding outcome (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.19-8.18; P = .81; I2 = 0%) between the two treatments. In the meta-analysis including also retrospective studies, overall risk of bias was considered "serious," and 4104 patients were included with no differences in APT vs OAC for stroke (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.53-2.11; P = .29; I2 = 18%); no other comparisons were possible. The pooled meta-analysis of prospective studies on stenting for CAD included four series, for a total of 68 patients, in whom stenting was adopted primarily after failed medical therapy or after traumatic dissection. The pooled rate of stroke/death was 7% (95% CI, 3%-17%; I2 = 0%). The analysis of moderators identified a significant inverse association between the percentage of traumatic dissection and a reduction in postoperative stroke (Y = -1.60-2.02X; P = .03). The pooled rate of the composite endpoint of stroke/death/ or major bleeding was 8% (95% CI, 3%-18%; I2 = 0%). Secondarily, the meta-analysis also included 17 retrospective studies with overall 457 patients and showed a 2.1% pooled rate of stroke/death (95% CI, 1.0%-3.3%; I2 = 0%) and 3.2% stroke/death/bleeding (95% CI, 1.8%-4.7%; I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Few prospective studies on CAD treatment are present in literature. APT and OAC seem to have similar efficacy in reducing the recurrence of stroke after CAD. No definitive conclusion can be drawn for stenting, due to the low number of studies available. More prospective studies are necessary to evaluate its potential additional value over medical therapy alone in the early phase after CAD.

High risk and low prevalence diseases: Spontaneous cervical artery dissection

INTRODUCTION

Spontaneous cervical artery dissection (sCAD) is a serious condition that carries with it a high rate of morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

This review highlights the pearls and pitfalls of sCAD, including presentation, diagnosis, and management in the emergency department (ED) based on current evidence.

DISCUSSION

sCAD is a condition affecting the carotid or vertebral arteries and occurs as a result of injury and compromise to the arterial wall layers. The dissection most commonly affects the extracranial vessels but may extend intracranially, resulting in subarachnoid hemorrhage. Patients typically present with symptoms due to compression of local structures, and the presentation depends on the vessel affected. The most common symptom is headache and/or neck pain. Signs and symptoms of ischemia may occur, including transient ischemic attack and stroke. There are a variety of risk factors for sCAD, including underlying connective tissue or vascular disorders, and there may be an inciting event involving minimal trauma to the head or neck. Diagnosis includes imaging, most commonly computed tomography angiography of the head and neck. Ultrasound can diagnose sCAD but should not be used to exclude the condition. Treatment includes specialist consultation (neurology and vascular specialist), consideration of thrombolysis in appropriate patients, symptomatic management, and administration of antithrombotic medications.

CONCLUSIONS

An understanding of sCAD can assist emergency clinicians in diagnosing and managing this potentially deadly disease.

Antiplatelets Versus Anticoagulation in Cervical Artery Dissection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 2064 Patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In young people aged < 50 years, cervical artery dissection (CeAD) is among the most common causes of stroke. Currently, there is no consensus regarding the safest and most effective antithrombotic treatment for CeAD. We aimed to synthesize concrete evidence from studies that compared the efficacy and safety of antiplatelet (AP) versus anticoagulant (AC) therapies for CeAD.

METHODS

We searched major electronic databases/search engines from inception till September 2021. Cohort studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing anticoagulants with antiplatelets for CeAD were included. A meta-analysis was conducted using articles that were obtained and found to be relevant. Mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used for continuous data and odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for dichotomous data.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 15 studies involving 2064 patients, 909 (44%) of whom received antiplatelets and 1155 (56%) received anticoagulants. Our analysis showed a non-significant difference in terms of the 3-month mortality (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.03-7.58), > 3-month mortality (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.40-6.56), recurrent stroke (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.46-2.02), recurrent transient ischaemic attack (TIA) (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.44-1.98), symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH) (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.12-1.19), and complete recanalization (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46-1.06). Regarding primary ischaemic stroke, the results favoured AC over AP among RCTs (OR 6.97, 95% CI 1.25-38.83).

CONCLUSION

Our study did not show a considerable difference between the two groups, as all outcomes showed non-significant differences between them, except for primary ischaemic stroke (RCTs) and complete recanalization (observational studies), which showed a significant favour of AC over AP. Even though primary ischaemic stroke is an important outcome, several crucial points that could affect these results should be paid attention to. These include the incomplete adjustment for the confounding effect of AP-AC doses, frequencies, administration compliance, and others. We recommend more well-designed studies to assess if unnecessary anticoagulation can be avoided in CeAD.

Antiplatelets or anticoagulants? Secondary prevention in cervical artery dissection: an updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Extracranial artery dissection involving either internal carotid artery or vertebral artery is a major cause of stroke in adults under 50 years of age. There is no conclusive evidence whether antiplatelets or anticoagulants are better suited in the treatment of extracranial artery dissection.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether antiplatelets or anticoagulants have advantage over the other in the treatment of extracranial artery dissection for secondary prevention of recurrent ischemic events or death.

METHODS

Present meta-analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement. Database search was done in Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to May 2021 using pre-defined search strategy. Additional studies were identified from reference lists from included studies, reviews and previous meta-analyses. Outcome measures were ischaemic stroke, ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA), and death.

RESULTS

Two RCTs and 64 observational studies were included in the meta-analysis. While the outcome measures of stroke, stroke or TIA and death were numerically higher with antiplatelet use, there were no statistically significant differences between antiplatelets and anticoagulants.

CONCLUSION

We found no significant difference between antiplatelet and anticoagulation treatment after extracranial artery dissection. The choice of treatment should be tailored to individual cases.

Oral Anticoagulant and Antiplatelet Therapy for Cervical Artery Dissection: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials

Carotid and vertebral artery dissections are estimated to account for ∼20% of strokes in patients under 45-years-old. This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of treatment with anticoagulants versus antiplatelet agents to determine the optimal therapy. We searched 4 electronic databases for clinical trials published from January 1, 1980 to August 25, 2021 that included patients who received anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy for carotid and/or vertebral artery dissections. The curative effect was judged by recanalization evaluated by imaging. The primary outcomes were all cause death and ischemic stroke; secondary outcomes included hemorrhage and transient ischemic attack (TIA). Patients who received only a single drug treatment were divided into antiplatelet or anticoagulant groups; all received conservative treatment without surgical intervention. For this investigation, we pooled the available studies to conduct a meta-analysis, which included 7 articles with 1126 patients. The curative effect of vascular recanalization was not significantly different between the 2 treatment groups (odds ratio [OR] = 0.913, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.611-1.365, P = .657); similarly, no significant differences were found regarding the primary outcomes all cause death (OR = 1.747, 95%CI: 0.202-15.079, P = .612) and ischemic stroke (OR = 2.289, 95%CI: 0.997-5.254, P = .051). Patients treated with anticoagulants were more likely to experience TIA (OR = 0.517, 95%CI: 0.252-1.060, P = .072) and hemorrhage (OR = 0.468, 95%CI: 0.210-1.042, P = .063), but the differences were not statistically significant. Overall, there were no statistically significant differences between anticoagulant therapy and antiplatelet therapy for the treatment of carotid and vertebral artery dissections.

ESO guideline for the management of extracranial and intracranial artery dissection

The aim of the present European Stroke Organisation guideline is to provide clinically useful evidence-based recommendations on the management of extracranial artery dissection (EAD) and intracranial artery dissection (IAD). EAD and IAD represent leading causes of stroke in the young, but are uncommon in the general population, thus making it challenging to conduct clinical trials and large observational studies. The guidelines were prepared following the Standard Operational Procedure for European Stroke Organisation guidelines and according to GRADE methodology. Our four recommendations result from a thorough analysis of the literature comprising two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing anticoagulants to antiplatelets in the acute phase of ischemic stroke and twenty-six comparative observational studies. In EAD patients with acute ischemic stroke, we recommend using intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with alteplase within 4.5 hours of onset if standard inclusion/exclusion criteria are met, and mechanical thrombectomy in patients with large vessel occlusion of the anterior circulation. We further recommend early endovascular or surgical intervention for IAD patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). Based on evidence from two phase 2 RCTs that have shown no difference between the benefits and risks of anticoagulants versus antiplatelets in the acute phase of symptomatic EAD, we strongly recommend that clinicians can prescribe either option. In post-acute EAD patients with residual stenosis or dissecting aneurysms and in symptomatic IAD patients with an intracranial dissecting aneurysm and isolated headache, there is insufficient data to provide a recommendation on the benefits and risks of endovascular/surgical treatment. Finally, nine expert consensus statements, adopted by 8 to 11 of the 11 experts involved, propose guidance for clinicians when the quality of evidence was too low to provide recommendations. Some of these pertain to the management of IAD (use of IVT, endovascular treatment, and antiplatelets versus anticoagulation in IAD with ischemic stroke and use of endovascular or surgical interventions for IAD with headache only). Other expert consensus statements address the use of direct anticoagulants and dual antiplatelet therapy in EAD-related cerebral ischemia, endovascular treatment of the EAD/IAD lesion, and multidisciplinary assessment of the best therapeutic approaches in specific situations.

Cerebral infarct secondary to traumatic internal carotid artery dissection

BACKGROUND

Traumatic internal carotid artery dissection (TICAD) is rare and can result in severe neurological disability and even death. No consensus regarding its diagnostic screening and management has been established.

AIM

To investigate the clinical presentation, imaging features, diagnostic workup, and treatment of TICAD.

METHODS

In this retrospective case series, emergency admissions for TICAD due to closed head injury were analyzed. The demographic, clinical, and radiographic data were retrieved from patient charts and the picture archiving and communication system.

RESULTS

Six patients (five males and one female, age range of 43-62 years, mean age of 52.67 years) presented with TICAD. Traffic accidents (4/6) were the most frequent cause of TICAD. The clinical presentation was always related to brain hypoperfusion. Imaging examination revealed dissection of the affected artery and corresponding brain infarction. All the patients were definitively diagnosed with TICAD. One patient was treated conservatively, one patient underwent anticoagulant therapy, two patients were given both antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs, and two patients underwent decompressive craniectomy. One patient fully recovered, while three patients were disabled at follow-up. Two patients died of refractory brain infarction.

CONCLUSION

TICAD can cause catastrophic outcomes and even refractory brain hernia. Early and efficient diagnosis of TICAD is essential for initiating appropriate treatment. The treatment of TICAD is challenging and variable and is based on clinician discretion on a case-by-case basis.

Recanalization of cervicocephalic artery dissection

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:

While there exists a substantial literature on the risk factors and clinical manifestations of cervical artery dissection (CeAD) including carotid and vertebral artery, little is known about postdissection recanalization. The goal of our study was to provide a descriptive analysis of CeAD and recanalization after dissection with neuroimaging follow up.

METHODS:

We retrospectively analyzed 51 consecutive patients with confirmed diagnoses of CeAD based on neuroimaging. Demographic data, risk factors, and dissection characteristics were recorded. Neuroimaging studies were performed at 0, 3, 6, and >6 months.

RESULTS:

Among 51 cases, the mean age of dissection (mean ± standard error) was 49.4 ± 1.92 years, and female comprised 58.8% of the patients. Extent of stenosis was 100% dissection in 37.3%, 51%–99% in 41.2%, and <51% in 21.5%. The most common presenting symptoms were headache (54.9%), neck pain (49.0%), and dizziness/gait imbalance (39.2%). The most common associated risk factors were recent history of trauma to the head and neck (41.2%) and hypertension (41.2%). In follow-up imaging, overall, 47.1% (24/51) had complete recanalization (CR), while 35.3% (18/51) did not; in the former group, 75% (18/24) recanalized completely during the first 6 months following symptom onset. A majority (84.3%) of the patients were discharged home, 15.7% were discharged to a facility, and no mortality was reported. Interestingly, location, type-/nature of dissection, and treatment did not statistically appear to influence the likelihood of recanalization.

CONCLUSIONS:

The recanalization of CeAD occurs mainly within the first 6 months after symptom onset, following which healing slows down. The study did not find an association between location, pattern, or nature of dissection on artery recanalization.