Direct Endovascular Thrombectomy or With Prior Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Meta-Analysis

Real-world setting comparison of bridging therapy versus direct mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Intravenous Thrombolysis (IVT) prior to Mechanical Thrombectomy (MT) for Acute Ischaemic Stroke (AIS) due to Large-Vessel Occlusion (LVO) remains controversial. Therefore, the authors performed a meta-analysis of the available real-world evidence focusing on the efficacy and safety of Bridging Therapy (BT) compared with direct MT in patients with AIS due to LVO.

METHODS

Four databases were searched until 01 February 2023. Retrospective and prospective studies from nationwide or health organization registry databases that compared the clinical outcomes of BT and direct MT were included. Odds Ratios (ORs) and 95 % Confidence Intervals (CIs) for efficacy and safety outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Of the 12 studies, 86,695 patients were included. In patients with AIS due to LVO, BT group was associated with higher odds of achieving excellent functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0-1) at 90 days (OR = 1.48, 95 % CI 1.25-1.75), favorable discharge disposition (to the home with or without services) (OR = 1.33, 95 % CI 1.29-1.38), and decreased mortality at 90 days (OR = 0.62, 95 % CI 0.56-0.70), as compared with the direct MT group. In addition, the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage did not increase significantly in the BT group.

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis indicates that BT was associated with favorable outcomes in patients with AIS due to LVO. These findings support the current practice in a real-world setting and strengthen their validity. For patients eligible for both IVT and MT, BT remains the standard treatment until more data are available.

Thrombolysis in Stroke-Heart Syndrome: a useful tool for neurocardiac wellness?

INTRODUCTION

Stroke-heart syndrome is a physiopathological condition of cardiac suffering due to cerebral injury secondary to major vessel occlusion in anterior circulation. It can be detected by increase in cardiac blood biomarkers. Our aim was to investigate a possible ancillary effect of thrombolysis in mitigating Stroke-Heart Syndrome after acute ischaemic stroke.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively collected ischaemic stroke patients admitted to our Stroke Unit between August 1, 2017 and December 31, 2020 and acutely treated for an intracranial anterior circulation occlusion, without anamnestic ischaemic cardiopathy. We divided patients into Group B ("Bridge") including patients treated with both thrombolysis and thrombectomy and Group D ("Direct") including primary thrombectomies.

RESULTS

120 patients were included in the study. Group B consisted of 92 patients, Group D of 28 patients, without significant differences in age, baseline and discharge NIHSS, cardiovascular risk factors or TOAST aetiology. Whilst admission, troponin levels were similar in both groups, significant differences in troponin peak (median 16 ng/L in Group B vs 45 ng/L in Group D, p = 0.022) and BNP values (median 455 pg/mL in Group B vs 784 pg/mL in Group D, p = 0.031) were found in the first 72 h since admission. Functional independence at discharge was significantly higher in Group B than Group D (mRS 0-2 36% vs 10%, p = 0.011).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Significant differences in troponin peak and BNP values suggest a reduced stroke-related heart impairment in patients treated with bridge therapeutic approach: thrombolysis prior to thrombectomy could have a complementary effect on reducing Stroke-Heart Syndrome, improving overall neurological outcome.

Predictive factors of poor outcome and mortality among anterior ischaemic stroke patients despite successful recanalisation in China: a secondary analysis of the CAPTURE trial

OBJECTIVES

This work aimed to analyse the risk factors for poor outcomes and mortality among patients with anterior large vessel occlusion (LVO) ischaemic stroke, despite successful recanalisation.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This study conducted a secondary analysis among patients who underwent successful recanalisation in the CAPTURE trial. The trial took place between March 2018 and September 2020 at 21 sites in China. The CAPTURE trial enrolled patients who had an acute ischaemic stroke aged 18-80 years with LVO in anterior circulation.

INTERVENTIONS

Thrombectomy was immediately performed using Neurohawk or the Solitaire FR after randomisation in CAPTURE trial. Rescue treatment was available for patients with severe residual stenosis caused by atherosclerosis.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary goal was to predict poor 90-day survival or mortality within 90 days post-thrombectomy. Univariate analysis, using the χ2 test or Fisher's exact test, was conducted for each selected factor. Subsequently, a multivariable analysis was performed on significant factors (p≤0.10) identified through univariate analysis using the backward selection logistic regression approach.

RESULTS

Among the 207 recruited patients, 79 (38.2%) exhibited poor clinical outcomes, and 26 (12.6%) died within 90 days post-thrombectomy. Multivariate analysis revealed that the following factors were significantly associated with poor 90-day survival: age ≥67 years, internal carotid artery (ICA) occlusion (compared with middle cerebral artery (MCA) occlusion), initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score ≥17 and final modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) score 2b (compared with mTICI 3). Additionally, the following factors were significantly associated with mortality 90 days post-thrombectomy: initial NIHSS score ≥17, ICA occlusion (compared with MCA occlusion) and recanalisation with more than one pass.

CONCLUSIONS

Age, NIHSS score, occlusion site, mTICI score and the number of passes can be independently used to predict poor 90-day survival or mortality within 90 days post-thrombectomy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04995757.

Clinical evidence comparing bridging and direct endovascular thrombectomy: progress and controversies

Clinical evidence comparing bridging endovascular thrombectomy (bEVT) with intravenous thrombolysis and direct endovascular thrombectomy (dEVT) without thrombolysis for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) presented directly to an EVT-capable center is overwhelming but inconsistent. This study aimed to analyze the progress and controversies in clinical evidence based on current meta-analyses. Three databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, were searched. Relevant data were extracted and reviewed from the pooled studies. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Review (AMSTAR-2) was used for quality assessment. Twenty-five meta-analyses were finally included. There were 56% (14/25) from Asian countries, 20% (5/25) from North America, and 24% (6/25) from Europe. The majority (72%, 18/25) of evidence arose in a short period from 2020 to 2022 with the serial publication of four randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Among the 25 meta-analyses, 11 pooled at least three RCTs but there is substantial overlap among seven (five recruited the same four RCTs solely and two recruited the same three RCTs solely). Meanwhile, quality rating based on AMSTAR-2 showed 16 'high' rated studies (64%). For functional independence, 40% (10/25) of studies favored bEVT and 60% showed neutral results. For symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, most studies (82.6%, 19/23) showed no significant difference. Non-RCT studies contributed to evidence favoring bEVT. Current RCTs provide an update of clinical evidence comparing bEVT and dEVT. However, they simultaneously contribute to an unnecessary overlap among studies. Contemporary observational studies demonstrated different but possibly confounded evidence. Thus, this issue still requires more clinical evidence under standard procedures.

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.

A study on endovascular treatment alone and bridging treatment for acute ischemic stroke

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with alteplase (a recombinant tissue plasminogen activator, rt-PA) before endovascular treatment (EVT) is beneficial for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients in different periods.

METHODS

This study enrolled a total of 140 patients hospitalized between 2019 and 2022 with AIS from large vessel occlusion (LVO) in the anterior circulation. Those patients were divided into the EVT alone group and IVT + EVT group, in which EVT was preceded by intravenous rt-PA. According to the time from onset to femoral artery puncture, the above two groups were divided into the following subgroups: < 4.5 h, between 4.5 and 6 h, between 6 and 8 h, and between 8 and 10 h. There were 78 patients in the EVT alone group and 62 patients in the IVT + EVT group.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in functional independence, recanalization rate, favorable outcome rate, or mortality between the EVT and IVT + EVT groups (P > 0.05). After adjusting for confounding factors, a lower incidence of intracerebral hemorrhage was observed in the EVT group (P < 0.05). A comparison of time-dependent efficacy between the two groups showed that within 6-8 h, there were statistically significant differences between admission and postoperation in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores at 24 h (P = 0.01) or 7 days (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Although there was no difference in clinical efficacy and safety between the abovementioned two groups, treatment with IVT + EVT could increase the risk of bleeding compared to EVT. Moreover, in the 6-8 h subgroup, the efficacy of EVT alone was better than that of IVT + EVT.

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.

Endovascular thrombectomy with or without intravenous alteplase for acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Among patients who had an ischaemic stroke presenting directly to a stroke centre where endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is immediately available, there is uncertainty regarding the role of intravenous thrombolysis agents before or concurrently with EVT. To support a rapid guideline, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the impact of EVT alone versus EVT with intravenous alteplase in patients who had an acute ischaemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion.

METHODS

In November 2021, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, clincialtrials.gov and the ISRCTN registry for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EVT alone versus EVT with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke. We conducted meta-analyses using fixed effects models and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

In total 6 RCTs including 2334 participants were eligible. Low certainty evidence suggests that, compared with EVT and alteplase, there is possibly a small decrease in the proportion of patients independent with EVT alone (risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.05; risk difference (RD) -1.5%; 95% CI -5.4% to 2.5%), and possibly a small increase in mortality with EVT alone (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.29; RD 1.2%, 95% CI -2.0% to 4.9%) . Moderate certainty evidence suggests that there is probably a small decrease in symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH) with EVT alone (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.07; RD -1.0%; 95%CI -1.8% to 0.27%).

CONCLUSIONS

Low certainty evidence suggests that there is possibly a small decrease in the proportion of patients that achieve functional independence and a small increase in mortality with EVT alone. Moderate certainty evidence suggests that there is probably a small decrease in sICH with EVT alone. The accompanying guideline provides contextualised guidance based on this body of evidence.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021249873.