Bridging therapy and direct mechanical thrombectomy in the treatment of cardiogenic cerebral infarction with anterior circulation macrovascular occlusion

Direct Mechanical Thrombectomy vs. Bridging Therapy in Stroke Patients in A “Stroke Belt” Region of Southern Europe

The aim of this 4-year observational study is to analyze the outcomes of stroke patients treated with direct mechanical thrombectomy (dMT) compared to bridging therapy (BT) (intravenous thrombolysis [IVT] + BT) based on 3-month outcomes, in real clinical practice in the "Stroke Belt" of Southern Europe. In total, 300 patients were included (41.3% dMT and 58.6% BT). The frequency of direct referral to the stroke center was similar in the dMT and BT group, whereas the time from onset to groin was longer in the BT group (median 210 [IQR 160–303] vs. 399 [IQR 225–675], p = 0.001). Successful recanalization (TICI 2b-3) and hemorrhagic transformation were similar in both groups. The BT group more frequently showed excellent outcomes at 3 months (32.4% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.004). Multivariate analysis showed that BT was independently associated with excellent outcomes (OR 2.7. 95% CI,1.2–5.9, p = 0.02) and lower mortality (OR 0.36. 95% CI 0.16–0.82, p = 015). Conclusions: Compared with dMT, BT was associated with excellent functional outcomes and lower 3-month mortality in this real-world clinical practice study conducted in a region belonging to the “Stroke Belt” of Southern Europe. Given the disparity of results on the benefit of BT in the current evidence, it is of vital importance to analyze the convenience of its use in each health area.

Intravenous Thrombolysis Combined with Arterial Thrombolysis (Bridging Therapy) Effectively Improves Vascular Recanalization Rate in Patients with Cerebral Infarction

Objective

To explore the efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis combined with arterial thrombolysis (bridging therapy) in patients with acute cerebral infarction and its effect on serum inflammatory factors.

Methods

The case data of 138 patients with acute cerebral infarction admitted to our hospital from February 2019 to February 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the treatment plan they received, patients were assigned to two groups, namely, an observation group (n = 71) treated with bridging therapy and a control group (n = 67) treated with intravenous thrombolysis alone. The following indexes were recorded and compared between the two groups: treatment efficacy, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, activities of daily living, incidence rates of vascular recanalization, intracranial hemorrhage and reembolization after treatment, levels of inflammatory factors before and after treatment, levels of prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and fibrinogen (FIB) before and 1 week after treatment, and modified Rankin Scale scores 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment.

Results

Compared with the control group, the therapeutic efficacy, neurological function, activities of daily living, and vascular recanalization were markedly better in the observation group (P > 0.05). In addition, the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage and reembolization was statistically lower in the observation group (P < 0.05). No marked difference was found between the two groups in terms of pretreatment serum inflammatory factors and coagulation function (P > 0.05), while the above indicators improved statistically after treatment in both groups, with comparatively more obvious improvement in the observation group. It was also observed that, compared with the control group, the modified Rankin Scale score in the observation group was significantly better at 3 and 6 months after treatment (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Bridging therapy can improve the vascular recanalization rate among patients suffering from acute cerebral infarction, reduce the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage and reembolization, and improve the prognosis and neurological function of patients, which is worthy of clinical application.