IV thrombolysis plus thrombectomy versus IV thrombolysis alone for minor stroke with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion from the IRETAS and Italian SITS-ISTR cohorts

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) <4.5 h after symptom onset plus mechanical thrombectomy (MT) <6 h with those treated with IVT alone <4.5 h for minor stroke (NIHSS ≤5) with large vessel occlusion (LVO) in the anterior circulation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients enrolled in the Italian Registry of Endovascular Treatment in Acute Stroke (IRETAS) and in the Italian centers included in the SITS-ISTR were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among the patients with complete data on 24-h ICH type, 236 received IVT plus MT and 382 received IVT alone. IVT plus MT was significantly associated with unfavorable shift on 24-h ICH types (from no ICH to PH-2) (OR, 2.130; 95% CI, 1.173-3.868; p=0.013) and higher rate of PH (OR, 4.363; 95% CI, 1.579-12.055; p=0.005), sICH per ECASS II definition (OR, 5.527; 95% CI, 1.378-22.167; p=0.016), and sICH per NINDS definition (OR, 3.805; 95% CI, 1.310-11.046; p=0.014). Among the patients with complete data on 3-month mRS score, 226 received IVT plus MT and 262 received IVT alone. No significant difference was reported between IVT plus MT and IVT alone on mRS score 0-1 (72.1% versus 69.1%), mRS score 0-2 (79.6% versus 79%), and death (6.2% versus 6.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with IVT alone, IVT plus MT was associated with unfavorable shift on 24-h ICH types and higher rate of 24-h PH and sICH in patients with minor stroke and LVO in the anterior circulation. However, no difference was reported between the groups on 3-month functional outcome measures.

Mechanical thrombectomy in patients with heart failure: the Italian registry of Endovascular Treatment in Acute Stroke

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) is the second most important cardiac risk factor for stroke after atrial fibrillation (AF). Few data are available on mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients with HF.

METHODS

The source of data is the multicentre Italian Registry of Endovascular Treatment in Acute Stroke (IRETAS). All AIS patients ≥ 18 years receiving MT were categorised in two groups: HF and no-HF. Baseline clinical and neuroradiological findings on admission were analysed.

RESULTS

Of 8924 patients, 642 (7.2%) had HF. Compared to the no-HF group, HF patients had higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors. Rate of complete recanalisation (TICI 2b-3) was 76.9% in HF vs 78.1% in no-HF group (p = 0.481). Rate of symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage at 24-h non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) was 7.6% in HF vs 8.3% in no-HF patients (p = 0.520). At 3 months, 36.4% of HF patients and 48.2% of no-HF patients (p < 0.001) had mRS 0-2, and mortality was, respectively, 30.7% and 18.5% (p < 0.001). In multivariate logistic regression, HF was independently associated with mortality at 3 months (OR 1.53, 1.24-1.88 95% CI, p < 0.001). In multivariate ordinal regression, HF patients had a probability of transitioning to a higher mRS level of 1.23 (1.05-1.44 95% CI, p = 0.012). The propensity score analysis of two groups matched for age, sex, and NIHSS at admission yielded the same results.

CONCLUSION

MT is safe and effective in HF patients with AIS. Patients with HF and AIS suffered from higher 3-month mortality and unfavourable outcome regardless of acute treatments.

Clinical Reasoning: Acute Monocular Vision Loss in a Patient With Ipsilateral Extracranial Chronic Internal Carotid Artery Occlusion

We report the case of a middle-aged man who presented with acute painless monocular vision loss. His medical history was remarkable for chronic total occlusion of the ipsilateral internal carotid artery (ICA) and a recent carotid endarterectomy (CEA) on the contralateral ICA. In a stepwise multidisciplinary approach assessment, we review the differential diagnosis of acute vision loss and investigate how the patient's intra- and extra-cranial hemodynamic reorganization following chronic ICA occlusion may impact the clinical reasoning. Early complications of CEA and the differential diagnosis of new-onset anisocoria are also discussed.

Stroke management during the COVID-19 outbreak: challenges and results of a hub-center in Lombardy, Italy

Purpose

We describe the reorganization carried out during the COVID-19 outbreak at one of the stroke centers in Italy and report on the clinical features and procedural variables of stroke patients in need of endovascular treatment.

Methods

From 1 March to 10 May 2020, we retrospectively analyzed data from stroke patients in need of urgent neurointerventional treatment. Clinical presentation, demographics, and clinical history were collected along with procedural variables (door-to-needle time, needle-to-mTiCi time). Each patient underwent a nasal swab (polymerase chain reaction test), clinical screening, and chest CT scan to assess the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Technical success, procedural safety (including staff SARS-CoV-2 infection), and clinical outcome at discharge were retrieved. A comparison was made with the same patient population treated between 1 March and 10 May 2019 to highlight possible differences in the characteristics or outcomes of the patients.

Results

One hundred thirty-six ischemic stroke patients were admitted to our facility from 1 March to 10 May 2020. Of these, 12 patients (9%) were classified as “high risk” for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Radiological suspicion of COVID-19 was confirmed in all cases by pharyngeal swab. Five SARS-CoV-2 patients (42%) needed endovascular therapy. None of the staff members tested positive for IgG against SARS-CoV-2. Compared to the same period in 2019, an increase in the mean interval from the first symptoms to hospital arrival was observed (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Endovascular treatment of stroke presented several challenges during the COVID-19 outbreak. Within the hospital, special pathways can be used to maintain both procedural safety and procedural times.