Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Int J Stroke ; : 17474930241268303, 2024 Jul 31.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39075750

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare direct aspiration, stent retriever, and the combined thrombectomy technique on clinical, safety, and technical outcomes in late-window stroke patients included in the MR CLEAN-LATE trial. METHODS: This post hoc analysis of the MR CLEAN-LATE trial included patients treated with direct aspiration, stent retriever, or combined thrombectomy technique as first-line approach. Primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days follow-up, and compared between the three groups with ordinal logistic regression analysis. Secondary outcomes included mortality at 90 days, total technique switches, procedure time, recanalization rate measured with the expanded thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (eTICI) score, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Predefined variables were used for adjustments. RESULTS: In the MR CLEAN-LATE trial, 258 patients underwent endovascular treatment and 232 were included in our analyses. The mRS at 90 days did not differ (stent retriever vs. direct aspiration: adjusted common odds ratio (acOR) = 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.73 to 2.50; stent retriever vs. combined: acOR = 1.13, 95% CI = 0.64 to 2.00; direct aspiration vs. combined: acOR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.64 to 2.21). Direct aspiration thrombectomy was accompanied with more switches to another technique compared to the stent retriever (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 6.50, 95% CI = 2.52 to 16.8) or combined group (aOR = 4.67, 95% CI = 1.80 to 12.1) and with higher sICH rates compared to the combined technique (13% vs. 2.5%; aOR = 8.19, 95% CI = 1.49 to 45.1). Mortality, procedure time, and eTICI did not differ. CONCLUSION: Stent retriever, direct aspiration, or the combined thrombectomy technique as first-line approach showed no differences in clinical outcome in late-window stroke patients. Direct aspiration was accompanied with higher sICH rates and more switcher to another technique compared to the combined group.

2.
Eur Stroke J ; 9(2): 348-355, 2024 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38153049

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The MR CLEAN-LATE trial has shown that patient selection for endovascular treatment (EVT) in the late window (6-24 h after onset or last-seen-well) based on the presence of collateral flow on CT-angiography is safe and effective. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of late-window collateral-based EVT-selection compared to best medical management (BMM) over a lifetime horizon (until 95 years of age). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A model-based economic evaluation was performed from a societal perspective in The Netherlands. A decision tree was combined with a state-transition (Markov) model. Health states were defined by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Initial probabilities at 3-months post-stroke were based on MR CLEAN-LATE data. Transition probabilities were derived from previous literature. Information on short- and long-term resource use and utilities was obtained from a study using MR CLEAN-LATE and cross-sectional data. All costs are expressed in 2022 euros. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were discounted at a rate of 4% and 1.5%, respectively. The effect of parameter uncertainty was assessed using probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). RESULTS: On average, the EVT strategy cost €159,592 (95% CI: €140,830-€180,154) and generated 3.46 QALYs (95% CI: 3.04-3.90) per patient, whereas the costs and QALYs associated with BMM were €149,935 (95% CI: €130,841-€171,776) and 2.88 (95% CI: 2.48-3.29), respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per QALY and the incremental net monetary benefit were €16,442 and €19,710, respectively. At a cost-effectiveness threshold of €50,000/QALY, EVT was cost-effective in 87% of replications. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Collateral-based selection for late-window EVT is likely cost-effective from a societal perspective in The Netherlands.


Asunto(s)
Angiografía por Tomografía Computarizada , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/economía , Procedimientos Endovasculares/métodos , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico/economía , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico/terapia , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico/diagnóstico por imagen , Angiografía por Tomografía Computarizada/economía , Anciano , Masculino , Femenino , Circulación Colateral/fisiología , Países Bajos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Modelos Económicos
3.
Eur Stroke J ; 8(1): 224-230, 2023 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37021181

RESUMEN

Background: Endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is performed in intervention centers that provide the full range of neuro(endo)vascular care (level 1) and centers that only perform EVT for AIS (level 2). We compared outcomes between these center types and assessed whether differences in outcomes could be explained by center volume (CV). Patients and methods: We analyzed patients included in the MR CLEAN Registry (2014-2018), a registry of all EVT-treated patients in the Netherlands. Our primary outcome was the shift on the modified Rankin scale (mRS) after 90 days (ordinal regression). Secondary outcomes were the NIHSS 24-48 h post-EVT, door-to-groin time (DTGT), procedure time (linear regression), and recanalization (binary logistic regression). We compared outcomes between level 1 and 2 centers using multilevel regression models, with center as random intercept. We adjusted for relevant baseline factors, and in case of observed differences, we additionally adjusted for CV. Results: Of the 5144 patients 62% were treated in level 1 centers. We observed no significant differences between center types in mRS (adjusted(a)cOR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.40 to 1.54), NIHSS (aß: 0.31, 95% CI: -0.52 to 1.14), procedure duration (aß: 0.88, 95% CI: -5.21 to 6.97), or DTGT (aß: 4.24, 95% CI: -7.09 to 15.57). The probability for recanalization was higher in level 1 centers compared to level 2 centers (aOR 1.60, 95% CI: 1.10 to 2.33), and this difference probably depended on CV. Conclusions: We found no significant differences, that were independent of CV, in the outcomes of EVT for AIS between level 1 and level 2 intervention centers.


Asunto(s)
Isquemia Encefálica , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Humanos , Accidente Cerebrovascular/cirugía , Isquemia Encefálica/cirugía , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico/cirugía , Resultado del Tratamiento , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Sistema de Registros
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...