Remote Teleproctoring with the TEGUS System for Mechanical Thrombectomy in a Non-Comprehensive Stroke Center: Initial Preliminary Data On Clinical Experience.

PURPOSE: Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is typically performed by experienced neurointerventional radiologists. However, logistical and geographic limitations often hinder access to rapid MT. This study reports the first clinical experience using TEGUS teleproctoring to support MT conducted by general interventional radiologists (IR) at non-comprehensive stroke centers, compared to on-site proctoring outcomes. METHODS: The Arnau de Vilanova Hospital in Spain used to transfer stroke patients requiring MT to a comprehensive Stroke Center 160 km away. To overcome COVID-19 mobility restrictions, the Tegus Teleproctoring System was installed. Before teleproctoring, the general interventional radiologist underwent six months of neurointerventional training at a primary stroke center. From April 2021 to May 2023, general IR conducted MT either with on-site proctor supervision or teleproctoring support. We aim to compare clinical outcome of patients receiving MT according to proctoring method. RESULTS: During the study, 49 MTs were performed: 15 with TEGUS teleproctoring and 34 with on-site proctoring. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics, except for NIHSS scores (Tegus 9 [IQR 6-20] vs 18 [IQR 12-22], p = 0.034). No significant differences were found in door-to-revascularization time (82 ± 28.2 vs 84 ± 26.4) min, p = (0.895). The final mTICI distribution and 90-day mRS scores were comparable after adjusting by stroke severity. There were no reports of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage in either group. CONCLUSION: This study shows the feasibility of Tegus remote teleproctoring during emergent cases of MT in a remote hospital. It could improve the learning curve of interventional radiologists with limited experience in MT, and lower the territorial inequity associated to MT.

Stent Retriever AssIsted Lysis Technique with Tirofiban: A Potential Bailout Alternative to Angioplasty and Stenting.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Angioplasty and stent placement have been described as a bailout technique in individuals with failed thrombectomy. We aimed to investigate Stent retriever AssIsted Lysis (SAIL) with tirofiban before angioplasty and stent placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients from 2 comprehensive stroke centers were reviewed (2020-2023). We included patients with failed thrombectomy and/or underlying intracranial stenosis who received SAIL with tirofiban before the intended angioplasty and stent placement. SAIL consisted of deploying a stent retriever through the occluding lesion to create a bypass channel and infuse 10 mL of tirofiban for 10 minutes either intra-arterially or IV. The stent retriever was re-sheathed before retrieval. The primary end points were successful reperfusion (expanded TICI 2b-3) and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage. Additional end points included 90-day mRS 0-2 and mortality. RESULTS: After a median of 3 (interquartile range, 2-4) passes, 44 patients received the SAIL bridging protocol with tirofiban, and later they were considered potential candidates for angioplasty and stent placement bailout (43.2%, intra-arterial SAIL). Post-SAIL successful reperfusion was obtained in 79.5%. A notable residual stenosis (>50%) after successful SAIL was observed in 45.7%. No significant differences were detected according to post-SAIL: successful reperfusion (intra-arterial SAIL, 80.0% versus IV-SAIL, 78.9%; P = .932), significant stenosis (33.3% versus 55.0%; P = .203), early symptomatic re-occlusion (0% versus 8.0%; P = .207), or symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (5.3% versus 8.0%; P = .721). Rescue angioplasty and stent placement were finally performed in 15 (34.1%) patients (intra-arterial SAIL 21.0% versus IV-SAIL 44%; P = .112). At 90 days, mRS 0-2 (intra-arterial SAIL 50.0% versus IV-SAIL 43.5%; P = .086) and mortality (26.3% versus 12.0%; P = .223) were also similar. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stroke in which angioplasty and stent placement are considered, SAIL with tirofiban, either intra-arterial or IV, seems to safely induce sustained recanalization, offering a potential alternative to definitive angioplasty and stent placement.

Radial Versus Femoral Access for Mechanical Thrombectomy in Patients With Stroke: A Noninferiority Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Transfemoral access is predominantly used for mechanical thrombectomy in patients with stroke with a large vessel occlusion. Following the interventional cardiology guidelines, routine transradial access has been proposed as an alternative, although its safety and efficacy remain controversial. We aim to explore the noninferiority of radial access in terms of final recanalization. METHODS: The study was an investigator-initiated, single-center, evaluator-blinded, noninferiority randomized clinical trial. Patients with stroke undergoing mechanical thrombectomy, with a patent femoral artery and a radial artery diameter ≥2.5 mm, were randomly assigned (1:1) to either transradial (60 patients) or transfemoral access (60 patients). The primary binary outcome was the successful recanalization (expanded Treatment in Cerebral Ischemia score, 2b-3) assigned by blinded evaluators. We established a noninferiority margin of -13.2%, considering an acceptable reduction of 15% in the expected recanalization rates. RESULTS: From September 2021 to July 2023, 120 patients were randomly assigned and 116 (58 transradial access and 58 transfemoral access) with confirmed intracranial occlusion on the initial angiogram were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Successful recanalization was achieved in 51 (87.9%) patients assigned to transfemoral access and in 56/58 (96.6%) patients assigned to transradial (adjusted 1 side risk difference [RD], -5.0% [95% CI, -6.61% to +13.1%]) showing noninferiority of transradial access. Median time from angiosuite arrival to first pass (femoral, 30 [interquartile range, 25-37] minutes versus radial: 41 [interquartile range, 33-62] minutes; P<0.001) and from angiosuite arrival to recanalization (femoral: 42 (IQR, 28-74) versus radial: 59.5 (IQR, 44-81) minutes; P<0.050) were longer in the transradial access group. Both groups presented 1 severe access complication and there was no difference in the rate of access conversion: transradial 7 (12.1%) versus transfemoral 5 (8.6%) (P=0.751). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who underwent mechanical thrombectomy, transradial access was noninferior to transfemoral access in terms of final recanalization. Procedural delays may favor transfemoral access as the default first-line approach. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT05225636.

Radial Versus Femoral Access for Mechanical Thrombectomy in Patients With Stroke: A Noninferiority Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Transfemoral access is predominantly used for mechanical thrombectomy in patients with stroke with a large vessel occlusion. Following the interventional cardiology guidelines, routine transradial access has been proposed as an alternative, although its safety and efficacy remain controversial. We aim to explore the noninferiority of radial access in terms of final recanalization. METHODS: The study was an investigator-initiated, single-center, evaluator-blinded, noninferiority randomized clinical trial. Patients with stroke undergoing mechanical thrombectomy, with a patent femoral artery and a radial artery diameter ≥2.5 mm, were randomly assigned (1:1) to either transradial (60 patients) or transfemoral access (60 patients). The primary binary outcome was the successful recanalization (expanded Treatment in Cerebral Ischemia score, 2b-3) assigned by blinded evaluators. We established a noninferiority margin of -13.2%, considering an acceptable reduction of 15% in the expected recanalization rates. RESULTS: From September 2021 to July 2023, 120 patients were randomly assigned and 116 (58 transradial access and 58 transfemoral access) with confirmed intracranial occlusion on the initial angiogram were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Successful recanalization was achieved in 51 (87.9%) patients assigned to transfemoral access and in 56/58 (96.6%) patients assigned to transradial (adjusted 1 side risk difference [RD], -5.0% [95% CI, -6.61% to +13.1%]) showing noninferiority of transradial access. Median time from angiosuite arrival to first pass (femoral, 30 [interquartile range, 25-37] minutes versus radial: 41 [interquartile range, 33-62] minutes; P<0.001) and from angiosuite arrival to recanalization (femoral: 42 (IQR, 28-74) versus radial: 59.5 (IQR, 44-81) minutes; P<0.050) were longer in the transradial access group. Both groups presented 1 severe access complication and there was no difference in the rate of access conversion: transradial 7 (12.1%) versus transfemoral 5 (8.6%) (P=0.751). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who underwent mechanical thrombectomy, transradial access was noninferior to transfemoral access in terms of final recanalization. Procedural delays may favor transfemoral access as the default first-line approach. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT05225636.

Absceso hipofisiario como causa de meningitis crónica / Pituitary abscess as cause of chronicle meningitis

Se presenta el caso clínico de una paciente con un cuadro de Meningitis crónica recurrente en que el diagnóstico de absceso selar sólo se logró al operarla con el diagnóstico de Adenoma Hipofisiario. Siendo el absceso hipofisiario una patología de muy baja frecuencia, la presencia de una Meningitis crónica recurrente como forma de presentación es aún más infrecuente. La literatura en general presenta muy pocas series de abscesos hipofisiarios, siendo la mayoría sólo comunicaciones de casos clínicos.

We present the case of a patient with a history of Recurrent Chronic Meningitis, in which the diagnosis of Pituitary abscess was only made after surgery under the diagnosis of Pituitary Adenoma. Given the low frequency of the Pituitary Abscess, the presence of a Recurrent Chronic Meningitis as its presentation is even more infrequent. The common literature presents only a few series of pituitary abscess, which, in most cases, are only case reports.

Síndrome de Immunodeficiencia Adquirida en Panameños / Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome in Panama

El Síndrome de Inmunodeficiencia Adquirida (SIDA) descrito inicialmente en los Estados Unidos de América (E.U.A.), se ha reportado en casi todo el mundo, incluso latinoamérica. En Panamá hay seis casos confirmados, cinco de los cuales han muerto. Describimos a continuación tres casos manejados en el Complejo Hospitalario Metropolitano de la Caja de Seguro Social (CHM, CSS). Todos fueron pacientes panameños del sexo masculino, dos de ellos viveron en el exterior por mucho tiempo. Uno era homosexual y drogadicto, otro promiscuo heterosexual mientras que el otro negaba cualquier factor de riesgo. El cuadro clínico inicial fue variable, pero todos tuvieron en común: fiebre y pérdida de peso. Las infecciones oportunistas encontradas fueron múltiples. Se destacó: la Candidiasis oral, la enteritis por Isospora belli y la histoplasmosis diseminada. Uno tuvo el Sarcoma de Kaposi (SK). En los tres casos hubo altereción de la función inmune confirmada mediante anergia cutánea, disminución de los linfocitos T cooperadores con inversión de la relación de linfocitos T cooperadores (OKT4) a linfocitos T supresores (OKT8)y una hipergammaglobulinemia policlonal. Todos presentaron el anticuerpo del virus linfotrópico de las células T humanas (HTLV-III/LAV). Los tres pacientes murieron: dos con histoplasmosis diseminada y uno con candidiasis sistémica y probable herpes diseminado. Alertamos a la comunidad médica panameña sobre esta entidad clínica cuya incidencia sospechamos va a ir aumentando debido a muchos