Efficacy and safety of bridging thrombolysis initiated before transfer in a drip-and-ship stroke service

Outcomes in elderly patients undergoing endovascular thrombectomy in association with premorbid Rankin Scale scores

Background

Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) reduces disability in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS); however, its efficacy in patients aged >80 years remains unclear.

Objectives

This study aimed to assess the impact of premorbid modified Rankin Scale (pmRS) scores and age on patients with AIS undergoing EVT and the effect of EVT on functional outcome and mortality.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study and screened the Heidelberg Recanalization Registry (HeiReKa) database for patients with AIS between 1999 and 2021. Outcomes were stratified by age (<80, 80-89, and ≥90 years) and pmRS score (0-2 vs. 3-5). Adjusted odds ratios for outcomes and mortality at 3 months after treatment were examined.

Results

Finally, 2,591 patients were included [including those aged ≥90 years (n = 158)]. Poor functional outcomes were associated with advanced age, vascular risk factors, stroke severity, and vessel status. Conversely, lower prestroke disability and younger age were associated with better outcomes and reduced mortality. A pmRS of 3-5 was associated with an increased risk of mortality and worse functional outcomes regardless of age. Notably, patients aged ≥90 years with a pmRS of 0-2 had significantly better outcomes than those aged <80 years with a pmRS of 3-5.

Conclusion

Both age and pmRS are important in assessing the benefits of EVT. However, prestroke functional status might be more crucial than biological age in determining outcomes following EVT.

Outcomes of Bridging Intravenous Thrombolysis Versus Endovascular Therapy Alone in Late-Window Acute Ischemic Stroke

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing bridging intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with direct endovascular therapy (EVT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke who present late are limited. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and safety of bridging IVT in patients with acute ischemic stroke due to anterior circulation large vessel occlusion who underwent EVT 6 to 24 hours after time last known well.

METHODS

We enrolled patients with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion stroke and a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of ≥6 from 20 centers across 10 countries in the multicenter retrospective CLEAR study (CT for Late Endovascular Reperfusion) between January 2014 and May 2022. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting modeling adjusted for clinical and imaging confounders to compare functional outcomes, reperfusion success, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and mortality between EVT patients with and without prior IVT.

RESULTS

Of 5098 patients screened for eligibility, we included 2749 patients, of whom 549 received bridging IVT before EVT. The timing of IVT was not recorded. Witnessed stroke onset and transfer rates were higher in the bridging IVT group (25% versus 12% and 77% versus 55%, respectively, P value for both <0.0001), and time intervals between stroke onset and treatment were shorter (time last known well-start of EVT median 560 minutes [interquartile range, 432-791] versus 724 minutes [interquartile range, 544-912]; P<0.0001). After adjustment for confounders, there was no difference in functional outcome at 3 months (adjusted common odds ratio for modified Rankin Scale shift, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.89-1.19]; P=0.72) or successful reperfusion (adjusted odds ratio, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.81-1.75]; P=0.39). There were no safety concerns associated with bridging IVT versus direct EVT (symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage: adjusted odds ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.38-1.48]; P=0.40; mortality: adjusted odds ratio, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.89-1.46]; P=0.31). Results were unchanged when the analysis was limited to patients who received IVT >6 hours after last known well.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with an anterior circulation large vessel occlusion stroke who underwent EVT 6 to 24 hours from last known well, bridging IVT was not associated with a difference in outcomes compared with direct EVT.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04096248.

Influence of prior intravenous thrombolysis in patients treated with mechanical thrombectomy for M2 occlusions: insight from the Endovascular Treatment in Ischemic Stroke (ETIS) registry

BACKGROUND

Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) for patients treated with mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for proximal occlusions has recently been questioned through randomized trials. However, few patients with M2 occlusions were included. We investigated the influence of prior IVT for patients presenting M2 occlusions treated with MT in comparison with MT alone.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of the Endovascular Treatment in Ischemic Stroke (ETIS) registry, a multicenter observational study. Data from consecutive patients treated with MT for M2 occlusions between January 2015 and January 2022 at 26 comprehensive stroke centers were analyzed. The primary endpoint was 90-day modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2. Outcomes were compared using propensity score approaches. We also performed sensitivity analysis in relevant subgroups of patients.

RESULTS

Among 1132 patients with M2 occlusions treated with MT, 570 received prior IVT. The two groups were comparable after propensity analysis. The rate of favorable functional outcome was significantly higher in the IVT+MT group compared with the MT alone group (59.8% vs 44.7%; adjusted OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.75, P=0.008). Hemorrhagic and procedural complications were similar in both groups. In sensitivity analysis excluding patients with anticoagulation treatment, favorable recanalization was more frequent in the IVT+MT group (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.70, P=0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

In cases of M2 occlusions, prior IVT combined with MT resulted in better functional outcome than MT alone, without increasing the rate of hemorrhagic or procedural complications. These results suggest the benefit of IVT in patients undergoing MT for M2 occlusions.

What You Always Wanted to Know about Endovascular Therapy in Acute Ischemic Stroke but Never Dared to Ask: A Comprehensive Review

In 2015, mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in combination with intravenous thrombolysis was demonstrated to be superior to best medical treatment alone in patients with anterior circulation stroke. This finding resulted in an unprecedented boost in endovascular stroke therapy, and MT became widely available. MT was initially approved for patients presenting with large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation (intracranial internal carotid artery or proximal middle cerebral artery) within a 6-hour time window. Eventually, it was shown to be beneficial in a broader group of patients, including those without known symptom-onset, wake-up stroke, or patients with posterior circulation stroke. Technical developments and the implementation of novel thrombectomy devices further facilitated endovascular recanalization for acute ischemic stroke. However, some aspects remain controversial. Is MT suitable for medium or very distal vessel occlusions? Should emergency stenting be performed for symptomatic stenosis or recurrent occlusion? How should patients with large vessel occlusion without disabling symptoms be treated? Do certain patients benefit from MT without intravenous thrombolysis? In the era of personalized decision-making, some of these questions require an individualized approach based on comorbidities, imaging criteria, and the severity or duration of symptoms. Despite its successful development in the past decade, endovascular stroke therapy will remain a challenging and fascinating field in the years to come. This review aims to provide an overview of patient selection, and the indications for and execution of MT in patients with acute ischemic stroke.

European Stroke Organisation - European Society for Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy expedited recommendation on indication for intravenous thrombolysis before mechanical thrombectomy in patients with acute ischaemic stroke and anterior circulation large vessel occlusion

Six randomized controlled clinical trials have assessed whether mechanical thrombectomy (MT) alone is non-inferior to intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) plus MT within 4.5 hours of symptom onset in patients with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion (LVO) ischaemic stroke and no contraindication to IVT. An expedited recommendation process was initiated by the European Stroke Organisation (ESO) and conducted with the European Society of Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy (ESMINT) according to ESO standard operating procedure based on the GRADE system. We identified two relevant Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome (PICO) questions, performed systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the literature, assessed the quality of the available evidence and wrote evidence-based recommendations. Expert opinion was provided if insufficient evidence was available to provide recommendations based on the GRADE approach. For stroke patients with anterior circulation LVO directly admitted to a MT-capable centre ('mothership') within 4.5 hours of symptom onset and eligible for both treatments, we recommend IVT plus MT over MT alone (moderate evidence, strong recommendation). MT should not prevent the initiation of IVT, nor should IVT delay MT. In stroke patients with anterior circulation LVO admitted to a centre without MT facilities and eligible for IVT ≤4.5 hrs and MT, we recommend IVT followed by rapid transfer to a MT capable-centre ('drip-and-ship') in preference to omitting IVT (low evidence, strong recommendation). Expert consensus statements on ischaemic stroke on awakening from sleep are also provided. Patients with anterior circulation LVO stroke should receive IVT in addition to MT if they have no contraindications to either treatment.

European Stroke Organisation (ESO)-European Society for Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy (ESMINT) expedited recommendation on indication for intravenous thrombolysis before mechanical thrombectomy in patients with acute ischemic stroke and anterior circulation large vessel occlusion

Six randomized controlled clinical trials have assessed whether mechanical thrombectomy (MT) alone is non-inferior to intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) plus MT within 4.5 hours of symptom onset in patients with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion (LVO) ischemic stroke and no contraindication to IVT. An expedited recommendation process was initiated by the European Stroke Organisation (ESO) and conducted with the European Society of Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy (ESMINT) according to ESO standard operating procedure based on the GRADE system. We identified two relevant Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome (PICO) questions, performed systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the literature, assessed the quality of the available evidence, and wrote evidence-based recommendations. Expert opinion was provided if insufficient evidence was available to provide recommendations based on the GRADE approach.For stroke patients with anterior circulation LVO directly admitted to a MT-capable center ('mothership') within 4.5 hours of symptom onset and eligible for both treatments, we recommend IVT plus MT over MT alone (moderate evidence, strong recommendation). MT should not prevent the initiation of IVT, nor should IVT delay MT. In stroke patients with anterior circulation LVO admitted to a center without MT facilities and eligible for IVT ≤4.5 hours and MT, we recommend IVT followed by rapid transfer to a MT capable-center ('drip-and-ship') in preference to omitting IVT (low evidence, strong recommendation). Expert consensus statements on ischemic stroke on awakening from sleep are also provided. Patients with anterior circulation LVO stroke should receive IVT in addition to MT if they have no contraindications to either treatment.