Safety Outcomes of Mechanical Thrombectomy Versus Combined Thrombectomy and Intravenous Thrombolysis in Tandem Lesions.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe the safety and efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) with or without intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) for patients with tandem lesions and whether using intraprocedural antiplatelet therapy influences MT's safety with IVT treatment. METHODS: This is a subanalysis of a pooled, multicenter cohort of patients with acute anterior circulation tandem lesions treated with MT from 16 stroke centers between January 2015 and December 2020. Primary outcomes included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and parenchymal hematoma type 2. Additional outcomes included hemorrhagic transformation, successful reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score 2b-3), complete reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score 3), favorable functional outcome (90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0-2), excellent functional outcome (90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0-1), in-hospital mortality, and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Of 691 patients, 512 were included (218 underwent IVT+MT and 294 MT alone). There was no difference in the risk of sICH (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.22 [95% CI, 0.60-2.51]; P=0.583), parenchymal hematoma type 2 (aOR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.47-2.08]; P=0.985), and hemorrhagic transformation (aOR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.62-1.46]; P=0.817) between the IVT+MT and MT alone groups after adjusting for confounders. Administration of IVT was associated with an increased risk of sICH in patients who received intravenous antiplatelet therapy (aOR, 3.04 [95% CI, 0.99-9.37]; P=0.05). The IVT+MT group had higher odds of a 90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 2 (aOR, 1.72 [95% CI, 1.01-2.91]; P=0.04). The odds of successful reperfusion, complete reperfusion, 90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 1, in-hospital mortality, or 90-day mortality did not differ between the IVT+MT versus MT alone groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that the combination of IVT with MT for tandem lesions did not increase the overall risk of sICH, parenchymal hematoma type 2, or overall hemorrhagic transformation independently of the cervical revascularization technique used. However, intraprocedural intravenous antiplatelet therapy during acute stent implantation might be associated with an increased risk of sICH in patients who received IVT before MT. Importantly, IVT+MT treatment was associated with a higher rate of favorable functional outcomes at 90 days.

Antiplatelet Therapy in Neurointervention.

The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the use of antiplatelet medication in neurointervention, with a focus on the clinical indications for antiplatelet use in both preventing and reducing platelet aggregation. This review will cover current antiplatelet medications, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics. We will provide an overview of different endovascular devices and discuss the antiplatelet regimes in neurointervention, highlighting gaps in evidence and scope for future studies.Two randomized controlled trials have evaluated antiplatelet use in the setting of acute large vessel occlusion stroke, with neither demonstrating benefit in their overall cohorts. Evidence on antiplatelet medication for both acute and elective stenting for acute stroke and treatment of cerebral aneurysms is currently based on large case series, and practice in neurointervention has increasingly utilized dual antiplatelet regimes with clopidogrel and second-line agents like prasugrel and ticagrelor. Clopidogrel function testing has an increasing role in neurointerventional procedures, particularly for high metal surface area stents such as the braided flow diverter type stents. Intravenous glycoprotein IIB/IIIA inhibitors have been utilized for both acute bridging and rescue therapy.Antiplatelet decision making is complex, and there are few randomized control trials to guide clinical practice. Comparative trials to guide decision making remain important in both the acute and elective settings. Standardised protocols incorporating platelet function testing may play a role in assisting decision making until more robust clinical evidence is available, particularly in the context of acute neurointerventional stenting for stroke and ruptured cerebral aneurysms.

Endovascular Thrombectomy for Anterior Circulation Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke: An Evolution of Trials.

The last decade's progress in demonstrating the clinical benefit of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in patients with large vessel occlusion stroke has transformed the paradigm of care for these patients. This review presents the milestones in implementing EVT as standard of care, demonstrates the current state of evidence, provides guidance for identifying the candidate patient for EVT, and highlights unsolved and controversial issues. Ongoing trials investigate broadening of EVT indications for patients who present with large core infarction, adjunctive intra-arterial thrombolysis, medium vessel occlusion, low NIHSS, and tandem occlusion.

Unsuccessful Recanalization versus Medical Management of Patients with Large Ischemic Core : Analysis of the ANGEL-ASPECT Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: The outcomes of patients with large ischemic core who fail to recanalize with endovascular therapy (EVT) compared to medical management (MM) are uncertain. The objective was to evaluate the clinical and safety outcomes of patients who underwent EVT in patients with large ischemic core and unsuccessful recanalization. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the ANGEL-ASPECT randomized trial. Unsuccessful recanalization was defined as patients who underwent EVT with eTICI 0-2a. The primary endpoint was 90-day very poor outcome (mRS 5-6). Multivariable logistic regression was conducted controlling for ASPECTS, occlusion location, intravenous thrombolysis, and time to treatment. RESULTS: Of 455 patients 225 were treated with MM. Of 230 treated with EVT, 43 (19%) patients had unsuccessful recanalization. There was no difference in 90-day very poor outcomes (39.5% vs. 40%, aOR 0.93, 95% confidence interval, CI 0.47-1.85, p = 0.95), sICH (7.0% vs. 2.7%, aOR 2.81, 95% CI 0.6-13.29, p = 0.19), or mortality (30% vs. 20%, aOR 1.65, 95% CI 0.89-3.06, p = 0.11) between the unsuccessful EVT and MM groups, respectively. There were higher rates of ICH (55.8% vs. 17.3%, p < 0.001), infarct core volume growth (142.7 ml vs. 90.5 ml, ß = 47.77, 95% CI 20.97-74.57 ml, p < 0.001), and decompressive craniectomy (18.6% vs. 3.6%, p < 0.001) in the unsuccessful EVT versus MM groups. CONCLUSION: In a randomized trial of patients with large ischemic core undergoing EVT with unsuccessful recanalization, there was no difference in very poor outcomes, sICH or death versus medically managed patients. In the unsuccessful EVT group, there were higher rates of any ICH, volume of infarct core growth, and decompressive craniectomy.

Effects of tirofiban on large vessel occlusion stroke are modified by etiology and renal function.

OBJECTIVE: Renal function can modify the outcomes of large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke across stroke etiologies in disparate degrees. The presence of renal function deficit can also impair the pharmacokinetics of tirofiban. Hence, this study aimed to investigate the roles of renal function in determining efficacy and safety of intravenous tirofiban before endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO). METHODS: This study was a post hoc exploratory analysis of the RESCUE-BT trial. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving functional independence (modified Rankin scale 0-2) at 90 days, and the primary safety outcome was the rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). RESULTS: Among 908 individuals with available serum creatinine, decreased estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) status was noted more commonly in patients with cardioembolic stroke (CE), while large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) was predominant in patients with normal renal function. In LAA with normal renal function, tirofiban was associated with higher rates of functional independence at 90 days (41.67% vs 59.80%, p = 0.003). However, for LVO patients with renal dysfunction, tirofiban did not improve functional outcomes for any of the etiologies (LAA, p = 0.876; CE, p = 0.662; others, p = 0.894) and significantly increased the risk of sICH among non-LAA patients (p = 0.020). Mediation analysis showed tirofiban reduced thrombectomy passes (12.27%) and drug/placebo to recanalization time (14.25%) mediated its effects on functional independence. CONCLUSION: This present study demonstrated the importance of evaluating renal function before administering intravenous tirofiban among patients with LVO who are planned to undergo EVT.

Association between intravenous tirofiban and intracranial hemorrhage in acute large vessel occlusion stroke: insight from the RESCUE BT randomized placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to investigate the association between intravenous tirofiban and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) secondary to large vessel occlusion (LVO) receiving endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) within 24 h of time last known well (LKW). METHODS: Patients with AIS-LVO who were randomly assigned to receive intravenous tirofiban or placebo before EVT within 24 h of time LKW and had follow-up brain non-contrast computed tomography within 24 h after stopping tirofiban treatment were derived from "RESCUE BT": a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. All eligible patients were divided into SICH and NO-SICH groups. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore for heterogeneity. RESULTS: Of 945 patients included in this cohort, there were 76 (8.0%) in the SICH group and 869 (92.0%) in the NO-SICH group. The incidence of SICH was not higher in patients receiving intravenous tirofiban compared with placebo (adjusted risk ratio (RR), 1.51; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.97-2.36; P = 0.07). Subgroup analyses showed that age greater than 67-year-old (adjusted RR, 2.18; 95% CI 1.18-4.00), NIHSS greater than 16 (adjusted RR, 1.88; 95% CI 1.06-3.34), and cardioembolism (adjusted RR, 3.73; 95% CI 1.66-8.35) were associated with increased SICH risk. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute large vessel occlusion stroke, intravenous tirofiban before EVT within 24 h of time from last known well is not associated with increased risk of SICH. Patients who are older, have more severe neurological deficits, or with cardioembolism are at higher risk of SICH with intravenous tirofiban. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: URL: http://www.chictr.org.cn ; Unique identifier: ChiCTR-INR-17014167.

Reocclusion after successful endovascular treatment in acute ischemic stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular treatment (EVT) is the standard of care for selected patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to large vessel occlusion (LVO). OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the available data on: (1) incidence, predictors, and outcomes of patients with reocclusion after successful EVT for AIS and, (2) the characteristics, complications, and outcomes of patients with reocclusion treated with repeated EVT (rEVT) within 30 days of the first procedure. METHODS: PubMed was searched (between January 2012 and April 2021) to identify studies reporting reocclusion following successful EVT (Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction ≥2b) in patients with AIS due to LVO. Pooled incidence of reocclusion per 100 patients with successful recanalization following EVT was calculated using a random-effects model with Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation. Extracted incidences of reocclusion according to etiology and use of intravenous thrombolysis were pooled using random-effects meta-analytic models. RESULTS: A total of 840 studies was identified and seven studies qualified for the quantitative analysis, which described 91 same-vessel reocclusions occurring within the first 7 days after treatment among 2067 patients (4.9%; 95% CI 3% to 7%, I2=70.2%). Large vessel atherosclerosis was associated with an increased risk of reocclusion (OR=3.44, 95% CI 1.12 to 10.61, I2=50%). We identified 90 patients treated with rEVT for recurrent LVO, described in five studies. The rates of procedural complications, mortality, and unfavorable functional outcome at 3 months were 18.0%, 18.9%, and 60.3%, respectively. CONCLUSION: In cohorts of patients with AIS due to LVO, 5% of patients experienced reocclusion within 7 days after successful EVT. Repeated EVT can be a safe and effective treatment for selected patients with reocclusion.

Specialist Perspectives on the Imaging Selection of Large Vessel Occlusion in the Late Window.

BACKGROUND: The proper imaging modality for use in the selection of patients for endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) presenting in the late window remains controversial, despite current guidelines advocating the use of advanced imaging in this population. We sought to understand if clinicians with different specialty training differ in their approach to patient selection for EVT in the late time window. METHODS: We conducted an international survey of stroke and neurointerventional clinicians between January and May 2022 with questions focusing on imaging and treatment decisions of large vessel occlusion (LVO) patients presenting in the late window. Interventional neurologists, interventional neuroradiologists, and endovascular neurosurgeons were defined as interventionists whereas all other specialties were defined as non-interventionists. The non-interventionist group was defined by all other specialties of the respondents: stroke neurologist, neuroradiologist, emergency medicine physician, trainee (fellows and residents) and others. RESULTS: Of 3000 invited to participate, 1506 (1027 non-interventionists, 478 interventionists, 1 declined to specify) physicians completed the study. Interventionist respondents were more likely to proceed directly to EVT (39.5% vs. 19.5%; p < 0.0001) compared to non-interventionist respondents in patients with favorable ASPECTS (Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score). Despite no difference in access to advanced imaging, interventionists were more likely to prefer CT/CTA alone (34.8% vs. 21.0%) and less likely to prefer CT/CTA/CTP (39.1% vs. 52.4%) for patient selection (p < 0.0001). When faced with uncertainty, non-interventionists were more likely to follow clinical guidelines (45.1% vs. 30.2%) while interventionists were more likely to follow their assessment of evidence (38.7% vs. 27.0%) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Interventionists were less likely to use advanced imaging techniques in selecting LVO patients presenting in the late window and more likely to base their decisions on their assessment of evidence rather than published guidelines. These results reflect gaps between interventionists and non-interventionists reliance on clinical guidelines, the limits of available evidence, and clinician belief in the utility of advanced imaging.

Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage.

Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage is a neurologic emergency that requires immediate patient stabilization and prompt diagnosis and treatment. Early measures should focus on principles of advanced cardiovascular life support. The aneurysm should be evaluated and treated in a comprehensive stroke center by a multidisciplinary team capable of endovascular and, operative approaches. Once the aneurysm is secured, the patient is best managed by a dedicated neurocritical care service to prevent and manage complications, including a syndrome of delayed neurologic decline. The goal of such specialized care is to prevent secondary injury, reduce length of stay, and improve outcomes for survivors of the disease.