Endovascular Versus Medical Therapy in Posterior Cerebral Artery Stroke: Role of Baseline NIHSS Score and Occlusion Site.

BACKGROUND: Acute ischemic stroke with isolated posterior cerebral artery occlusion (iPCAO) lacks management evidence from randomized trials. We aimed to evaluate whether the association between endovascular treatment (EVT) and outcomes in iPCAO acute ischemic stroke is modified by initial stroke severity (baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS]) and arterial occlusion site. METHODS: Based on the multicenter, retrospective, case-control study of consecutive iPCAO acute ischemic stroke patients (PLATO study [Posterior Cerebral Artery Occlusion Stroke]), we assessed the heterogeneity of EVT outcomes compared with medical management (MM) for iPCAO, according to baseline NIHSS score (≤6 versus >6) and occlusion site (P1 versus P2), using multivariable regression modeling with interaction terms. The primary outcome was the favorable shift of 3-month modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Secondary outcomes included excellent outcome (mRS score 0-1), functional independence (mRS score 0-2), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and mortality. RESULTS: From 1344 patients assessed for eligibility, 1059 were included (median age, 74 years; 43.7% women; 41.3% had intravenous thrombolysis): 364 receiving EVT and 695 receiving MM. Baseline stroke severity did not modify the association of EVT with 3-month mRS distribution (Pinteraction=0.312) but did with functional independence (Pinteraction=0.010), with a similar trend on excellent outcome (Pinteraction=0.069). EVT was associated with more favorable outcomes than MM in patients with baseline NIHSS score >6 (mRS score 0-1, 30.6% versus 17.7%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.01 [95% CI, 1.22-3.31]; mRS score 0 to 2, 46.1% versus 31.9%; aOR, 1.64 [95% CI, 1.08-2.51]) but not in those with NIHSS score ≤6 (mRS score 0-1, 43.8% versus 46.3%; aOR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.49-1.64]; mRS score 0-2, 65.3% versus 74.3%; aOR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.30-1.0]). EVT was associated with more symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage regardless of baseline NIHSS score (Pinteraction=0.467), while the mortality increase was more pronounced in patients with NIHSS score ≤6 (Pinteraction=0.044; NIHSS score ≤6: aOR, 7.95 [95% CI, 3.11-20.28]; NIHSS score >6: aOR, 1.98 [95% CI, 1.08-3.65]). Arterial occlusion site did not modify the association of EVT with outcomes compared with MM. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline clinical stroke severity, rather than the occlusion site, may be an important modifier of the association between EVT and outcomes in iPCAO. Only severely affected patients with iPCAO (NIHSS score >6) had more favorable disability outcomes with EVT than MM, despite increased mortality and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage.

Safety and clinical outcomes of endovascular therapy versus medical management in late presentation of large ischemic stroke.

INTRODUCTION: The benefit of endovascular therapy (EVT) among stroke patients with large ischemic core (ASPECTS 0-5) in the extended time window outside of trial settings remains unclear. We analyzed the effect of EVT among these stroke patients in real-world settings. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The CT for Late Endovascular Reperfusion (CLEAR) study recruited patients from 66 centers in 10 countries between 01/2014 and 05/2022. The extended time-window was defined as 6-24 h from last-seen-well to treatment. The primary outcome was shift of the 3-month modified Rankin scale (mRS) score. Safety outcomes included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and mortality. Outcomes were analyzed with ordinal and logistic regressions. RESULTS: Among 5098 screened patients, 2451 were included in the analysis (median age 73, 55% women). Of patients with ASPECTS 0-5 (n = 310), receiving EVT (n = 209/310) was associated with lower 3-month mRS when compared to medical management (median 4 IQR 3-6 vs 6 IQR 4-6; aOR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.7). Patients undergoing EVT had higher sICH (11.2% vs 4.0%; aOR 4.1, 95% CI 1.2-18.8) and lower mortality (31.6% vs 58.4%, aOR 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-0.9) compared to medically managed patients. The relative benefit of EVT was comparable between patients with ASPECTS 0 and 5 and 6-10 in the extended time window (interaction aOR 0.9; 95% CI 0.5-1.7). CONCLUSION: In the extended time window, patients with ASPECTS 0-5 may have preserved relative treatment benefit of EVT compared to patients with ASPECTS 6-10. These findings are in line with recent trials showing benefit of EVT among real-world patients with large ischemic core in the extended time window. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04096248.