Effect of Needle-To-Puncture Time on Reperfusion Outcome in Acute Ischemic Stroke.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to investigate the impact of time interval between start of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) to start of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) on stroke outcomes. METHODS: Data from the Quality Improvement and Clinical Research (QuICR) provincial stroke registry from Alberta, Canada, were used to identify stroke patients who received IVT and EVT from January 2015 to December 2019. We assessed the impact of the time interval between IVT bolus to EVT puncture (needle-to-puncture times [NPT]) on outcomes. Radiological outcomes included successful initial recanalization (revised Arterial Occlusive Lesion 2b-3), successful initial and final reperfusion (modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 2b-3). Clinical outcomes were 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and mortality. RESULTS: Of the 680 patients, 233 patients (median age: 73, 41% females) received IVT + EVT. Median NPT was 38 min (IQR, 24-60). Arrival during working hours was independently associated with shorter NPT (p < 0.001). Successful initial recanalization and initial and final reperfusion were observed in 12%, 10%, and 83% of patients, respectively. NPT was not associated with initial successful recanalization (OR 0.97 for every 10-min increase of NPT, 95% CI: 0.91-1.04), initial successful reperfusion (OR 1.01, 95% CI: 0.96-1.07), or final successful reperfusion (OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.97-1.08). Every 10-min delay in NPT was associated with lower odds of functional independence at 90 days (mRS ≤2; OR: 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88-0.97). Patients with shorter NPT (≤38 min) had lower 90-day mRS scores (median 1 vs. 3; OR: 0.54 [0.31-0.91]) and had lower mortality (6.1% vs. 21.2%; OR, 0.23 [0.10-0.57]) than the longer NPT group. CONCLUSION: Shorter NPT did not impact reperfusion outcomes but was associated with better clinical outcome.

Cytoprotective agents in stroke: Still uncertainty in the next frontier.

INTRODUCTION: Despite substantial improvement of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) care with the advent of extended time windows for intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and endovascular thrombectomy (EVT), a substantial portion of patients still suffer poor outcomes. Additional adjuvant therapies are needed but pharmacologic interactions among therapies may dictate how they could be used. We conducted a survey to determine physician decision-making regarding the use of cytoprotective agents in patients presenting with AIS. METHODS: The survey was structured, web-based, anonymous, and invite-only among physicians across the world treating patients presenting with AIS. Respondents were asked about the use of a hypothetical cytoprotective agent (that provided an added 10% benefit) in the context of a treatment interaction with IVT or its timing in relation to IVT. RESULTS: A total of 282 stroke physicians (74.9% males, mean age 46 years) participated in the survey. When the respondent could give both the cytoprotective agent and IVT with no treatment interaction, 177 (78.0%) chose to administer both. In the presence of treatment interaction, 88 (38.3%) would withhold IVT, 83 (36.1%) would withhold the cytoprotective agent and 56 (24.4%) were uncertain. Lastly, 111 (48.9%) were willing to administer the cytoprotective agent if it meant a necessary 10-minute delay in IVT administration. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacologic interactions result in major uncertainty about cytoprotective treatment choices.

Infarcts in a New Territory: Insights From the ESCAPE-NA1 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Infarct in a new territory (INT) is a known complication of endovascular stroke therapy. We assessed the incidence of INT, outcomes after INT, and the impact of concurrent treatments with intravenous thrombolysis and nerinetide. METHODS: Data are from ESCAPE-NA1 trial (Safety and Efficacy of Nerinetide [NA-1] in Subjects Undergoing Endovascular Thrombectomy for Stroke), a multicenter, international randomized study that assessed the efficacy of intravenous nerinetide in subjects with acute ischemic stroke who underwent endovascular thrombectomy within 12 hours from onset. Concurrent treatment and outcomes were collected as part of the trial protocol. INTs were identified on core lab imaging review of follow-up brain imaging and defined by the presence of infarct in a new vascular territory, outside the baseline target occlusion(s) on follow-up brain imaging (computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging). INTs were classified by maximum diameter (<2, 2-20, and >20 mm), number, and location. The association between INT and clinical outcomes (modified Rankin Scale and death) was assessed using standard descriptive techniques and adjusted estimates of effect were derived from Poisson regression models. RESULTS: Among 1092 patients, 103 had INT (9.3%, median age 69.5 years, 49.5% females). There were no differences in baseline characteristics between those with versus without INT. Most INTs (91/103, 88.3%) were not associated with visible occlusions on angiography and 39 out of 103 (37.8%) were >20 mm in maximal diameter. The most common INT territory was the anterior cerebral artery (27.8%). Almost half of the INTs were multiple (46 subjects, 43.5%, range, 2-12). INT was associated with poorer outcomes as compared to no INT on the primary outcome of modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2 at 90 days (adjusted risk ratio, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.57-0.89]). Infarct volume in those with INT was greater by a median of 21 cc compared with those without, and there was a greater risk of death as compared to patients with no INT (adjusted risk ratio, 2.15 [95% CI, 1.48-3.13]). CONCLUSIONS: Infarcts in a new territory are common in individuals undergoing endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke and are associated with poorer outcomes. Optimal therapeutic approaches, including technical strategies, to reduce INT represent a new target for incremental quality improvement of endovascular thrombectomy. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02930018.

No Sex Differences in Mechanical Thrombectomy Time Metrics and Outcomes in Saskatchewan.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Numerous studies have shown longer pre-hospital and in-hospital workflow times and poorer outcomes in women after acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in general and after endovascular treatment (EVT) in particular. We investigated sex differences in acute stroke care of EVT patients over 5 years in a comprehensive Canadian provincial registry. METHODS: Clinical data of all AIS patients who underwent EVT between January 2017 and December 2022 in the province of Saskatchewan were captured in the Canadian OPTIMISE registry and supplemented with patient data from administrative data sources. Patient baseline characteristics, transport time metrics, and technical EVT outcomes between female and male EVT patients were compared. RESULTS: Three-hundred-three patients underwent EVT between 2017 and 2022: 144 (47.5%) women and 159 (52.5%) men. Women were significantly older (median age 77.5 [interquartile range: 66-85] vs.71 [59-78], p < 0.001), while men had more intracranial internal carotid artery occlusions (48/159 [30.2%] vs. 26/142 [18.3%], p = 0.03). Last-known-well to comprehensive stroke center (CSC)-arrival time (median 232 min [interquartile range 90-432] in women vs. 230 min [90-352] in men), CSC-arrival-to-reperfusion time (median 108 min [88-149] in women vs. 102 min [77-141] in men), reperfusion status (successful reperfusion 106/142 [74.7%] in women vs. 117/158 [74.1%] in men) as well as modified Rankin score at 90 days did not differ significantly. This held true after adjusting for baseline variables in multivariable analyses. CONCLUSION: While women undergoing EVT in the province of Saskatchewan were on average older than men, they were treated just as fast and achieved similar technical and clinical outcomes compared to men.

Validation of a machine learning software tool for automated large vessel occlusion detection in patients with suspected acute stroke.

PURPOSE: CT angiography (CTA) is the imaging standard for large vessel occlusion (LVO) detection in patients with acute ischemic stroke. StrokeSENS LVO is an automated tool that utilizes a machine learning algorithm to identify anterior large vessel occlusions (LVO) on CTA. The aim of this study was to test the algorithm's performance in LVO detection in an independent dataset. METHODS: A total of 400 studies (217 LVO, 183 other/no occlusion) read by expert consensus were used for retrospective analysis. The LVO was defined as intracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) occlusion and M1 middle cerebral artery (MCA) occlusion. Software performance in detecting anterior LVO was evaluated using receiver operator characteristics (ROC) analysis, reporting area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate if performance in detecting LVO differed by subgroups, namely M1 MCA and ICA occlusion sites, and in data stratified by patient age, sex, and CTA acquisition characteristics (slice thickness, kilovoltage tube peak, and scanner manufacturer). RESULTS: AUC, sensitivity, and specificity overall were as follows: 0.939, 0.894, and 0.874, respectively, in the full cohort; 0.927, 0.857, and 0.874, respectively, in the ICA occlusion cohort; 0.945, 0.914, and 0.874, respectively, in the M1 MCA occlusion cohort. Performance did not differ significantly by patient age, sex, or CTA acquisition characteristics. CONCLUSION: The StrokeSENS LVO machine learning algorithm detects anterior LVO with high accuracy from a range of scans in a large dataset.

Willingness to randomize primary medium vessel occlusions for endovascular treatment.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patients with acute ischemic stroke due to medium vessel occlusion (MeVO) make up a substantial part of the acute stroke population, though guidelines currently do not recommend endovascular treatment (EVT) for them. A growing body of evidence suggests that EVT is effective in MeVOs, including observational data but no randomized studies. We aimed to explore willingness of physicians worldwide to randomize MeVO stroke patients into a hypothetical trial comparing EVT in addition to best medical management versus best medical management only. METHODS: In an international cross-sectional survey among stroke physicians, participants were presented with 4 cases of primary MeVOs (6 scenarios each). Each subsequent scenario changed one key patient characteristic compared to the previous one, and asked survey participants whether they would be willing to randomize the described patient. Overall, physician- and scenario-specific decision rates were calculated. Multivariable logistic regression with clustering by respondent was performed to assess factors influencing the decision to randomize. RESULTS: Overall, 366 participants (56 women) from 44 countries provided 8784 answers to 24 MeVO case scenarios. The majority of responses (78.3%) were in favor of randomizing. Most physicians were willing to accept patients transferred for EVT from a primary center (82%) and the majority of these (76.5%) were willing to randomize these patients after transfer. Patient age > 65 years, A3 occlusion, small core volume, and patient intravenous alteplase eligibility significantly influenced the physician's decision to randomize (adjOR 1.24, 95%CI 1.13-1.36; adjOR 1.17, 95%CI 1.01-1.34; adjOR 0.98, 95%CI 0.97-0.99 and adjOR 1.38, 95%CI 1.21-1.57, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Most physicians in this survey were willing to randomize acute MeVO stroke patients irrespective of patient characteristics into a trial comparing EVT in addition to best medical management versus best medical management only, suggesting there is clinical equipoise.

A Detailed Analysis of Infarct Patterns and Volumes at 24-hour Noncontrast CT and Diffusion-weighted MRI in Acute Ischemic Stroke Due to Large Vessel Occlusion: Results from the ESCAPE-NA1 Trial.

Background The effect of infarct pattern on functional outcome in acute ischemic stroke is incompletely understood. Purpose To investigate the association of qualitative and quantitative infarct variables at 24-hour follow-up noncontrast CT and diffusion-weighted MRI with 90-day clinical outcome. Materials and Methods The Safety and Efficacy of Nerinetide in Subjects Undergoing Endovascular Thrombectomy for Stroke, or ESCAPE-NA1, randomized controlled trial enrolled patients with large-vessel-occlusion stroke undergoing mechanical thrombectomy from March 1, 2017, to August 12, 2019. In this post hoc analysis of the trial, qualitative infarct variables (predominantly gray [vs gray and white] matter involvement, corticospinal tract involvement, infarct structure [scattered vs territorial]) and total infarct volume were assessed at 24-hour follow-up noncontrast CT or diffusion-weighted MRI. White and gray matter infarct volumes were assessed in patients by using follow-up diffusion-weighted MRI. Infarct variables were compared between patients with and those without good outcome, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2 at 90 days. The association of infarct variables with good outcome was determined with use of multivariable logistic regression. Separate regression models were used to report effect size estimates with adjustment for total infarct volume. Results Qualitative infarct variables were assessed in 1026 patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 69 years ± 13; 522 men) and quantitative infarct variables were assessed in a subgroup of 358 of 1026 patients (mean age, 67 years ± 13; 190 women). Patients with gray and white matter involvement (odds ratio [OR] after multivariable adjustment, 0.19; 95% CI: 0.14, 0.25; P < .001), corticospinal tract involvement (OR after multivariable adjustment, 0.06; 95% CI: 0.04, 0.10; P < .001), and territorial infarcts (OR after multivariable adjustment, 0.22; 95% CI: 0.14, 0.32; P < .001) were less likely to achieve good outcome, independent of total infarct volume. Conclusion Infarct confinement to the gray matter, corticospinal tract sparing, and scattered infarct structure at 24-hour noncontrast CT and diffusion-weighted MRI were highly predictive of good 90-day clinical outcome, independent of total infarct volume. Clinical trial registration no. NCT02930018 © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Mossa-Basha in this issue.

Physician factors influencing endovascular treatment decisions in the management of unruptured intracranial aneurysms.

PURPOSE: Deciding about whether an unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) should be treated or not is challenging because robust data on rupture risks, endovascular treatment complication rates, and treatment success rates are limited. We aimed to investigate how neurointerventionalists conceptually approach endovascular treatment decision-making in UIAs. METHODS: In a web-based international multidisciplinary case-based survey among neurointerventionalists, participants provided their demographics and UIA treatment-volumes, estimated 5-year rupture rates, endovascular treatment complication and success rates and gave their endovascular treatment decision for 15 pre-specified UIA case-scenarios. Differences in estimated 5-year rupture rates, endovascular treatment complication and success rates based on physician and hospital characteristics were evaluated with the Kruskal-Wallis test. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to derive adjusted effect size estimates for predictors of endovascular treatment decision. RESULTS: Two hundred-thirty-three neurointerventionalists from 38 countries participated in the survey (median age 47 years [IQR: 41-55], 25/233 [10.7%] females). The ranges of estimates for 5-year rupture risks, endovascular treatment complication rates, and particularly endovascular treatment success rates were wide, especially for UIAs in the posterior circulation. Estimated 5-year rupture risks, endovascular treatment complication and success rates differed significantly based on personal and institutional endovascular UIA treatment volume, and all three estimates were significantly associated with physicians' endovascular treatment decision. CONCLUSION: Although several predictors of endovascular treatment decision were identified, there seems to be a high degree of uncertainty when estimating rupture risks, treatment complications, and treatment success for endovascular UIA treatment. More data on the clinical course of UIAs with and without endovascular treatment is needed.

Clinical impact of EVT with failed reperfusion in patients with acute ischemic stroke: results from the ESCAPE and ESCAPE-NA1 trials.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Endovascular treatment (EVT) is a powerful treatment for large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke if reperfusion can be achieved, while in cases with failed reperfusion, EVT may cause harm, as procedure-related complications may occur. We hypothesized that EVT with failed recanalization does not result in worse outcomes compared to best medical management and compared clinical outcomes of LVO stroke patients who underwent EVT with failed reperfusion to those who were treated with best medical management. METHODS: We included patients with failed reperfusion from the control (EVT-only) arm of the ESCAPE-NA1 trial and the EVT arm of the ESCAPE trial and patients of the ESCAPE control arm who were treated with best medical management. Failed reperfusion following EVT was defined as modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction score 0-2a. Proportions of good outcome (modified Rankin scale 0-2) were compared between patients who did and did not undergo EVT, and adjusted effect size estimates for EVT on outcomes were obtained. RESULTS: We included 260 patients (110 failed EVT and 150 non-EVT patients). Proportions of good outcome were 38/110 (34.6%) with failed EVT vs.43/147 (29.3%) without EVT (adjusted odds ratio[aOR]: 1.48 [95%CI: 0.81-2.68]). Mortality and proportions of sICH in the failed EVT group vs. patients treated with best medical management were 26/110 (23.6%) vs. 28/147 (19.1%), aOR: 1.12 (95%CI: 0.56-2.24), and 7/110 (6.4%) vs. 4/150 (2.7%), aOR: 2.34 (95%CI: 0.00-22.97). CONCLUSION: Clinical outcomes of EVT patients with failed reperfusion did not differ significantly from patients treated with best medical management.

Endovascular Therapy or Alteplase in Patients with Comorbidities: Insights from UNMASK EVT.

OBJECTIVE: Decisions to treat large-vessel occlusion with endovascular therapy (EVT) or intravenous alteplase depend on how physicians weigh benefits against risks when considering patients' comorbidities. We explored EVT/alteplase decision-making by stroke experts in the setting of comorbidity/disability. METHODS: In an international multi-disciplinary survey, experts chose treatment approaches under current resources and under assumed ideal conditions for 10 of 22 randomly assigned case scenarios. Five included comorbidities (cancer, cardiac/respiratory/renal disease, mild cognitive impairment [MCI], physical dependence). We examined scenario/respondent characteristics associated with EVT/alteplase decisions using multivariable logistic regressions. RESULTS: Among 607 physicians (38 countries), EVT was chosen less often in comorbidity-related scenarios (79.6% under current resources, 82.7% assuming ideal conditions) versus six "level-1A" scenarios for which EVT/alteplase was clearly indicated by current guidelines (91.1% and 95.1%, respectively, odds ratio [OR] [current resources]: 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.47). However, EVT was chosen more often in comorbidity-related scenarios compared to all other 17 scenarios (79.6% versus 74.4% under current resources, OR: 1.34, 1.17-1.54). Responses favoring alteplase for comorbidity-related scenarios (e.g. 75.0% under current resources) were comparable to level-1A scenarios (72.2%) and higher than all others (60.4%). No comorbidity independently diminished EVT odds when considering all scenarios. MCI and dependence carried higher alteplase odds; cancer and cardiac/respiratory/renal disease had lower odds. Being older/female carried lower EVT odds. Relevant respondent characteristics included performing more EVT cases/year (higher EVT-, lower alteplase odds), practicing in East Asia (higher EVT odds), and in interventional neuroradiology (lower alteplase odds vs neurology). CONCLUSION: Moderate-to-severe comorbidities did not consistently deter experts from EVT, suggesting equipoise about withholding EVT based on comorbidities. However, alteplase was often foregone when respondents chose EVT. Differences in decision-making by patient age/sex merit further study.

Clinical Course of Acute Ischemic Stroke Due to Medium Vessel Occlusion With and Without Intravenous Alteplase Treatment.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Available data on the clinical course of patients with acute ischemic stroke due to medium vessel occlusion (MeVO) are mostly limited to those with M2 segment occlusions. Outcomes are generally better compared with more proximal occlusions, but many patients will still suffer from severe morbidity. We aimed to determine the clinical course of acute ischemic stroke due to MeVO with and without intravenous alteplase treatment. METHODS: Patients with MeVO (M2/M3/A2/A3/P2/P3 occlusion) from the INTERRSeCT (The Identifying New Approaches to Optimize Thrombus Characterization for Predicting Early Recanalization and Reperfusion With IV Alteplase and Other Treatments Using Serial CT Angiography) and PRoveIT (Precise and Rapid Assessment of Collaterals Using Multi-Phase CTA in the Triage of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke for IA Therapy) studies were included. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were summarized using descriptive statistics. The primary outcome was a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 1 at 90 days, describing excellent functional outcome. Secondary outcomes were the common odds ratio for a 1-point shift across the modified Rankin Scale and functional independence, defined as modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2. We compared outcomes between patients with versus without intravenous alteplase treatment and between patients who did and did not show recanalization on follow-up computed tomography angiography. Logistic regression was used to provide adjusted effect-size estimates. RESULTS: Among 258 patients with MeVO, the median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 7 (interquartile range: 5-12). A total of 72.1% (186/258) patients were treated with intravenous alteplase and in 41.8% (84/201), recanalization of the occlusion (revised arterial occlusive lesion score 2b/3) was seen on follow-up computed tomography angiography. Excellent functional outcome was achieved by 50.0% (129/258), and 67.4% (174/258) patients gained functional independence, while 8.9% (23/258) patients died within 90 days. Recanalization was observed in 21.4% (9/42) patients who were not treated with alteplase and 47.2% (75/159) patients treated with alteplase (P=0.003). Early recanalization (adjusted odds ratio, 2.29 [95% CI, 1.23-4.28]) was significantly associated with excellent functional outcome, while intravenous alteplase was not (adjusted odds ratio, 1.70 [95% CI, 0.88-3.25]). CONCLUSIONS: One of every 2 patients with MeVO did not achieve excellent clinical outcome at 90 days with best medical management. Early recanalization was strongly associated with excellent outcome but occurred in <50% of patients despite intravenous alteplase treatment.

Endovascular treatment decision-making in acute ischemic stroke patients with large vessel occlusion and low National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale: insights from UNMASK EVT, an international multidisciplinary survey.

PURPOSE: Many stroke patients with large vessel occlusion present with a low National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). There is currently no level 1A recommendation for endovascular treatment (EVT) for this patient subgroup. From a physician's standpoint, the deficits might only be slight, but they are often devastating from a patient perspective. Furthermore, early neurologic deterioration is common. The purpose of this study was to explore endovascular treatment attitudes of physicians in acute ischemic stroke patients presenting with low admission NIHSS. METHODS: In an international cross-sectional survey among stroke physicians, participants were presented the scenario of a 76-year-old stroke patient with an admission NIHSS of 2. Survey participants were then asked how they would treat the patient (A) given their current local resources, and (B) under assumed ideal conditions, i.e., without external (monetary or infrastructural) constraints. Overall, country-specific and specialty-specific decision rates were calculated and clustered multivariable logistic regression performed to provide adjusted measures of effect size. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-five participants (150 neurologists, 84 interventional neuroradiologists, 30 neurosurgeons, 11 affiliated to other specialties) from 33 countries provided their treatment approach to this case scenario. Most physicians favored an endovascular treatment approach, either combined with intravenous alteplase (55.3% under assumed ideal and 52.0% under current working conditions) or as single treatment (11.3% under assumed ideal and 8.4% under current conditions). CONCLUSION: Despite the limited evidence for endovascular therapy in acute stroke patients with low NIHSS, most physicians in this survey decided to proceed with endovascular therapy. A randomized controlled trial seems warranted.

Endovascular Treatment Decision Making in Patients with Low Baseline ASPECTS: Insights from UNMASK EVT, an International Multidisciplinary Study.

BACKGROUND: Current stroke treatment guidelines restrict level 1A recommendations for endovascular therapy to patients with baseline ASPECTS score > 5. However, a recent meta-analysis from the HERMES-group showed treatment benefit in patients with ASPECTS ≤ 5. We aimed to explore how physicians across different specialties and countries approach endovascular treatment decision-making in acute ischemic stroke patients with low baseline ASPECTS. METHODS: In a multidisciplinary survey, 607 stroke physicians were randomly assigned 10 out of a pool of 22 case-scenarios, 3 of which involved patients with low baseline ASPECTS (A:40-year old with ASPECTS 4, B:33-year old with ASPECTS 2 C:72-year old with ASPECTS 3), otherwise fulfilling all EVT-eligibility criteria. Participants were asked how they would treat the patient A) under their current local resources and B) under assumed ideal conditions, without any external (monetary, policy-related or infrastructural) restraints. Overall and scenario-specific decision rates were calculated. Clustered multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine the association of baseline ASPECTS with endovascular treatment-decision. RESULTS: Baseline ASPECTS score was significantly associated with current (OR:1.09, CI 1.05-1.13) and ideal endovascular treatment-decision (OR:1.12, CI 1.08-1.16). Overall current and ideal treatment decision-rates for the low ASPECTS scenarios were 57.1% and 57.6%. Current and ideal rates for the two younger patients were higher (scenario A:69.9/60.4%, scenario B:60.0/61.5%) compared to the 72-year old patient (41.3/40.2%). CONCLUSION: Most physicians decided to proceed with endovascular treatment despite low baseline ASPECTS, particularly in younger patients. This may have implications on the design and execution of low ASPECTS randomized trials.

Influence of Guidelines in Endovascular Therapy Decision Making in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Insights From UNMASK EVT.

Background and Purpose- The American Heart Association and the American Stroke Association guidelines for early management of patients with ischemic stroke offer guidance to physicians involved in acute stroke care and clarify endovascular treatment indications. The purpose of this study was to assess concordance of physicians' endovascular treatment decision-making with current American Heart Association and the American Stroke Association stroke treatment guidelines using a survey-approach and to explore how decision-making in the absence of guideline recommendations is approached. Methods- In an international cross-sectional survey (UNMASK-EVT), physicians were randomly assigned 10 of 22 case scenarios (8 constructed with level 1A and 11 with level 2B evidence for endovascular treatment and 3 scenarios without guideline coverage) and asked to declare their treatment approach (1) under their current local resources and (2) assuming there were no external constraints. The proportion of physicians offering endovascular therapy (EVT) was calculated. Subgroup analysis was performed for different specialties, geographic regions, with regard to physicians' age, endovascular, and general stroke treatment experience. Results- When facing level 1A evidence, participants decided in favor of EVT in 86.8% under current local resources and in 90.6% under assumed ideal conditions, that is, 9.4% decided against EVT even under assumed ideal conditions. In case scenarios with level 2B evidence, 66.3% decided to proceed with EVT under current local resources and 69.7% under assumed ideal conditions. Conclusions- There is potential for improving thinking around the decision to offer endovascular treatment, since physicians did not offer EVT even under assumed ideal conditions in 9.4% despite facing level 1A evidence. A majority of physicians would offer EVT even for level 2B evidence cases.

Factors Associated With the Decision-Making on Endovascular Thrombectomy for the Management of Acute Ischemic Stroke.

Background and Purpose- Little is known about the real-life factors that clinicians use in selection of patients that would receive endovascular treatment (EVT) in the real world. We sought to determine patient, practitioner, and health system factors associated with therapeutic decisions around endovascular treatment. Methods- We conducted a multinational cross-sectional web-based study comprising of 607 clinicians and interventionalists from 38 countries who are directly involved in acute stroke care. Participants were randomly allocated to 10 from a pool of 22 acute stroke case scenarios. Each case was classified as either Class I, Class II, or unknown evidence according to the current guidelines. We used logistic regression analysis applying weight of evidence approach. Main outcome measures were multilevel factors associated with EVT, adherence to current EVT guidelines, and practice gaps between current and ideal practice settings. Results- Of the 1330 invited participants, 607 (45.6%) participants completed the study (53.7% neurologists, 28.5% neurointerventional radiologists, 17.8% other clinicians). The weighed evidence approach revealed that National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (34.9%), level of evidence (30.2%), ASPECTS (Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score) or ischemic core volume (22.4%), patient's age (21.6%), and clinicians' experience in EVT use (19.3%) are the most important factors for EVT decision. Of 2208 responses that met Class I evidence for EVT, 1917 (86.8%) were in favor of EVT. In case scenarios with no available guidelines, 1070 of 1380 (77.5%) responses favored EVT. Comparison between current and ideal practice settings revealed a small practice gap (941 of 6070 responses, 15.5%). Conclusions- In this large multinational survey, stroke severity, guideline-based level of evidence, baseline brain imaging, patients' age and physicians' experience were the most relevant factors for EVT decision-making. The high agreement between responses and Class I guideline recommendations and high EVT use even when guidelines were not available reflect the real-world acceptance of EVT as standard of care in patients with disabling acute ischemic stroke.

Worldwide Survey on Approach to Thrombolysis in Acute Ischemic Stroke With Large Vessel Occlusion.

Background and Objectives: With recent trials suggesting that endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) alone may be noninferior to combined intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with alteplase and EVT and that tenecteplase is non-inferior to alteplase in treating acute ischemic stroke, we sought to understand current practices around the world for treating acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion (LVO) depending on the center of practice (IVT-capable vs IVT and EVT-capable stroke center). Methods: The electronic survey launched by the Practice Current section of Neurology: Clinical Practice included 6 clinical and 8 demographic questions. A single-case scenario was presented of a 65-year-old man presenting with right hemiplegia with aphasia with a duration of 1 hour. Imaging showed left M1-MCA occlusion with no early ischemic changes. The respondents were asked about their treatment approach in 2 settings: the patient presented to (1) the IVT-only capable center and (2) the IVT and EVT-capable center. They were also asked about the thrombolytic agent of choice in current and ideal circumstances for these settings. Results: A total of 203 physicians (42.9% vascular neurologists) from 44 countries completed the survey. Most participants (55.2%) spent ≥50% of their time delivering stroke care. The survey results showed that in current practice, more than 90% of respondents would offer IVT + EVT to patients with LVO stroke presenting to either an EVT-capable (91.1%) or IVT-only-capable center (93.6%). Although nearly 80% currently use alteplase for thrombolysis, around 60% would ideally like to switch to tenecteplase independent of the practice setting. These results were similar between stroke and non-stroke neurologists. Discussion: Most physicians prefer IVT before EVT in patients with acute ischemic stroke attributable to large vessel occlusion independent of the practice setting.