Repeated Intra-Arterial Thrombectomy within 72 Hours in a Patient with a Clear Contraindication for Intravenous Thrombolysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Laible M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4322655 | biostudies-literature | 2015
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Repeated Intra-Arterial Thrombectomy within 72 Hours in a Patient with a Clear Contraindication for Intravenous Thrombolysis.
Laible Mona M Möhlenbruch Markus M Hacke Werner W Bendszus Martin M Ringleb Peter Arthur PA Rizos Timolaos T
Case reports in vascular medicine 20150127
Introduction. Treating patients with acute ischemic stroke, proximal arterial vessel occlusion, and absolute contraindication for administering intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) poses a therapeutic challenge. Intra-arterial thrombectomy constitutes an alternative treatment option. Materials and Methods. We report a case of a 57-year-old patient with concomitant gastric adenocarcinoma, who received three intra-arterial thrombectomies in 72 hours due to repeated occlusion ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background and Purpose: The role of intra-arterial (IA) thrombolysis in modern endovascular therapy is not well-understood. Here, we surveyed neurointerventionalists to understand their current clinical practices and opinions of IA thrombolysis in the new era of mechanical thrombectomy (MT). Method: A 24-question anonymous survey was distributed via email to the members of the Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology. Results: One hundred and four responses were included in the analysis. Most respondents were interventional neurologists (76.9%) and had ≥5-years in neuro-interventional practice (80.8%). IA thrombolytics are presently used by 60.6%. Aspiration plus stent-retriever was the most common MT approach used with IA-thrombolysis (66.0%). IA-thrombolysis was used in mainly three approaches: (1) treatment of primary distal occlusions, (2) as rescue after proximal occlusion thrombectomy, and (3) or as adjunct therapy to primary MT approach. The most frequent IA-rtPA dose was 3-10 mg, with 1 mg/min infusion rate (56.6%). 84.9% do not have a standardized protocol for administering IA-rtPA. About half (50.9%) believed there should be no time limit for administering IA lytic if there is a favorable imaging profile, while 30.2% indicated ≤6 h. Most respondents (76.5%) would consider using IA-tenecteplase in a trial setting. Only 12.9% felt there was no role for IA thrombolysis in modern endovascular practice. Respondents with ≥10-years' experience were less supportive of the future of IA lytic (98.0 vs. 76.4%, p = 0.006). Conclusion: IA-thrombolysis is currently used in clinical practice; however, there is no clear consensus on best practices or criteria for administration. Further studies are needed to define the role of IA-thrombolysis in the context of MT.
| S-EPMC6863970 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe efficacy and safety of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in acute large vessel occlusion (LVO) patients with minor stroke (NIHSS ≤ 5) remains undetermined. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of intra-arterial thrombolysis (IAT) alone vs. MT for LVO patients with minor stroke.MethodsPatients were selected from the Acute Ischemic Stroke Cooperation Group of Endovascular Treatment (ANGEL) registry, a prospective multicenter registry study, and divided into MT and IAT alone groups. We compared the outcome measures between the two groups, including 90-day functional outcome evaluated by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), the final recanalization level, intracranial hemorrhage, and mortality within 90-days by logistic regression models with adjustment. Besides the conventional multivariable analysis, we performed a sensitivity analysis by adjusting the propensity score to confirm our results. The propensity score was derived using a logistic regression model.ResultsOf the 120 patients, 63 received IAT alone and 57 received MT as the first-line treatment strategy. As compared to MT group, patients in the IAT alone group were associated with a higher chance of 90-day mRS 0-2 [93.7% vs. 71.9%, odds ratio (OR) = 4.75, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20-18.80, P = 0.027], a high chance of 90-day mRS 0-3 (96.8% vs. 86.7%, OR = 11.35, 95% CI: 1.93-66.86, P = 0.007), a shorter median time from puncture to recanalization (PTR) (60 min vs. 100 min, β = -63.70, 95% CI: -81.79- -45.61, P < 0.001), a lower chance of any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) within 48 h (3.2% vs. 19.3%, OR = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.03-0.79, P = 0.025), and a lower chance of mortablity within 90 days (1.6% vs. 9.2%, OR = 0.05, 95% CI: 0.01-0.57, P = 0.016). Similarly, the sensitivity analysis showed the robustness of the primary analysis.ConclusionsCompared with MT, IAT may improve 90-day clinical outcomes with decreased ICH rate and mortality in LVO patients with minor stroke.
| S-EPMC9315389 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Reperfusion following ischemic stroke can be attained by either intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) or intra-arterial thrombolysis (IAT). Only a limited number of randomized prospective studies have compared the efficacy and safety of IVT and IAT. This meta-analysis investigated possible clinical benefits of IAT relative to IVT in patients with acute ischemic stroke. METHODS:We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases through October 2013 for manuscripts that describe the findings of randomized controlled or prospective studies that evaluated the outcomes of patients with ischemic stroke who were treated with IVT or IAT. The clinical outcome measures were score on the modified Rankin scale (mRS) and mortality at 90 days. A favorable outcome was defined as an mRS score of 0 to 2. RESULTS:For the mRS, the combined odds ratio (OR) of 3.28 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.91 to 5.65, P < 0.001) indicated that patients who received IAT had a significantly higher chance for a favorable outcome than did those who received IVT. For mortality, the OR indicated that IAT therapy significantly reduced the proportion of patients who died within 90 days of the procedure (combined OR, 0.40; 95%CI, 0.17 to 0.92; P = 0.032). CONCLUSION:This meta-analysis determined that IAT conferred a significantly greater probability of achieving a favorable outcome compared with IVT. There was also a significant difference in mortality rates between IAT and IVT. The studies included in this analysis were small and heterogeneous; therefore, larger randomized prospective clinical studies are necessary to further investigate this issue.
| S-EPMC4287629 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeIV administration of tPA is accepted as a standard treatment for acute cerebral ischemia, but the clinical outcomes cannot be guaranteed in patients who are not recanalized after IV-tPA and in those who are not eligible for IV-tPA. In this study, outcomes from groups of patients treated with additional IA thrombolytic therapy with the use or omission of IV-tPA administration were compared.Materials and methodsIA thrombolytic therapy (thrombolytic agents combined with mechanical intervention) was attempted in those patients who were not eligible for IV-tPA and who showed continuous major vessel occlusion after IV-tPA. Sixty-three patients were divided into 2 groups: a tPA group (n = 29, IA thrombolysis after IV-tPA) and a non-tPA group (n = 34, IA thrombolysis without IV-tPA). These groups were subdivided according to match or mismatch DWI/PWI after MR imaging. Treatment results were compared by recanalization rate, clinical outcome, mortality, and ICH rate.ResultsThe recanalization rate was 79.3% in the tPA group and 55.9% in the non-tPA group (χ(2) test, P < .05). Subgroup analysis between DWI/PWI mismatch in the tPA group and DWI/PWI mismatch in the non-tPA group also showed no statistical difference in recanalization rate, favorable clinical outcome, and mortality (χ(2) test, P > .05), but the significant ICH rate was high in the tPA group (χ(2) test, P < .05).ConclusionsAdditional IA thrombolytic treatment after full-dose IV-tPA administration might be an acceptable treatment option for patients with DWI/PWI mismatch.
| S-EPMC7966079 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe smoking-paradox of a better outcome in ischemic stroke patients who smoke may be due to increased efficacy of thrombolysis. We investigated the effect of smoking on outcome following endovascular therapy (EVT) with mechanical thrombectomy alone versus in combination with intra-arterial (IA-) thrombolysis.MethodsThe primary endpoint was defined by three-month modified Rankin Scale (mRS). We performed a generalized linear model and reported relative risks (RR) for smoking (adjustment for age, sex, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, stroke severity, time to EVT) in patient data stemming from the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive-Endovascular database.ResultsAmong 1,497 patients, 740(49.4%) were randomized to EVT; among EVT patients, 524(35.0%) received mechanical thrombectomy alone and 216(14.4%) received it in combination with IA-thrombolysis. Smokers (N = 396) had lower mRS scores (mean 2.9 vs. 3.2; p = 0.02) and mortality rates (10% vs. 17.3%; p<0.001) in univariate analysis. In all patients and in patients treated with mechanical thrombectomy alone, smoking had no effect on outcome in regression analyses. In patients who received IA-thrombolysis (N = 216;14%), smoking had an adjusted RR of 1.65 for an mRS≤1 (95%CI 0.77-3.55). Treatment with IA-thrombolysis itself led to reduced RR for favorable outcome (adjusted RR 0.30); interaction analysis of IA-thrombolysis and smoking revealed that non-smokers with IA-thrombolysis had mRS≤2 in 47 cases (30%, adjusted RR 0.53 [0.41-0.69]) while smokers with IA-thrombolysis had mRS≤2 in 23 cases (38%, adjusted RR 0.61 [0.42-0.87]).ConclusionsSmokers had no clear clinical benefit from EVT that incorporates IA-thrombolysis.
| S-EPMC8136663 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Although current guidelines advocate pretreatment with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in all eligible patients with acute ischemic stroke with large-vessel occlusion before mechanical thrombectomy, there are observational data questioning the efficacy of this approach. One of the main arguments in favor of IVT pretreatment is the potential for tissue-type plasminogen activator-induced successful reperfusion (SR) before the onset of endovascular procedure. METHODS:We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials and observational cohorts providing rates of SR with IVT in patients with large-vessel occlusion before the initiation of mechanical thrombectomy. We also performed subgroup analyses according to study type (randomized controlled clinical trials versus observational) and according to the inclusion per protocol of patients with tandem (intracranial/extracranial) occlusions. RESULTS:We identified 13 eligible studies (7 randomized controlled clinical trials and 6 observational cohorts), including 1561 patients with acute ischemic stroke (median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, 17) with large-vessel occlusion. SR following IVT and before mechanical thrombectomy was documented in 11% (95% confidence interval, 7%-16%), with no difference among cohorts derived from randomized controlled clinical trials and observational studies. There was significant heterogeneity across included studies both in the overall analysis and among subgroups (I2>84%; P for Cochran Q, <0.001). Higher tissue-type plasminogen activator-induced SR rates were documented in studies reporting the exclusion of tandem occlusions (17%; 95% confidence interval, 11%-23%) compared with the rest (7%; 95% confidence interval, 4%-11%; P for subgroup differences, 0.003). CONCLUSIONS:Pretreatment with systemic thrombolysis in patients with large-vessel occlusion eligible for mechanical thrombectomy results in SR in 1 of 10 cases, negating the need for additional endovascular reperfusion. Tandem occlusions seem to be the least responsive to IVT pretreatment.
| S-EPMC5742056 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceIntravenous thrombolysis (IVT) followed by mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is recommended to treat acute ischemic stroke (AIS) with a large vessel occlusion (LVO). Most hospitals do not have on-site MT facilities, and most patients need to be transferred secondarily after IVT (drip and ship), which may have an effect on the neurologic outcome.ObjectiveTo compare the functional independence at 3 months between patients treated under the drip-and-ship paradigm and those treated on site (mothership).Design, setting, and participantsThis study used a prospectively gathered registry of patients with AIS to select patients admitted through the Saint-Antoine and Tenon (drip and ship) or the Fondation Rothschild (mothership) hospitals from January 1, 2013, through April 30, 2016. The study included patients older than 18 years treated with bridging therapy for AIS with LVO of the anterior circulation. Among the 159 patients who received MT at the mothership, 100 had been transferred after IVT from the drip-and-ship hospitals and 59 had received IVT on site.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was 3-month functional independence (modified Rankin scale score ≤2). Both groups were compared using a multivariate linear model, including variables that were significantly different in the 2 groups.ResultsDuring the study period, 497 patients were hospitalized at the drip-and-ship and mothership hospitals for an AIS eligible to reperfusion therapy; 11 patients had a basilar artery occlusion and were excluded, leaving 100 patients in the drip-and-ship group (mean age, 73 years; age range, 60-81 years; 57 men [57.0%]) and 59 in the mothership group (mean age, 70 years; age range, 58-82 years; 29 men [49.2%]). The proportion of patients with a favorable neurologic outcome at 3 months was similar in both groups (drip and ship, 61 [61.0%]; mothership, 30 [50.8%]; P = .26), even after adjusting the analysis for the baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, diffusion-weighted imaging Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score, and general anesthesia (P = .82). Patients had less severe conditions in the drip-and-ship group (median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, 15 vs 17 [P = .03]; median diffusion-weighted imaging Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score, 7.5 vs 7 [P = .05]). Process times were longer in the drip-and-ship group (onset-to-needle time, 150 vs 135 minutes; onset-to-puncture time, 248 vs 189 minutes; and onset-to-recanalization time, 297 vs 240 minutes; P < .001). Both groups were similar in terms of substantial recanalization (Thrombolysis in Cerebral Ischemia scores 2B to 3; drip and ship, 84 [84.0%]; mothership, 47 [79.7%]; P = .49) and symptomatic hemorrhagic transformation (drip and ship, 2 [2.0%]; mothership, 2 [3.4%]; P = .63).Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that patients treated under the drip-and-ship paradigm also benefit from bridging therapy, with no statistically significant difference compared with those treated directly in a comprehensive stroke center.
| S-EPMC5822198 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeRecent single-center series and meta-analyses suggest that mechanical thrombectomy (MT) without prior intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) might be equally effective to bridging therapy. We analyzed, within the Endovascular Treatment in Ischemic Stroke (ETIS) prospective observational registry, the angiographic and clinical outcomes after IVT+MT versus MT alone.MethodsFrom December 2012 to December 2016, a total of 1,507 consecutive patients with a proximal arterial occlusion of the anterior circulation were treated by MT. Of these, 975 (64.7%) received prior IVT. Immediate angiographic and clinical outcomes at 90 days (modified Rankin Scale [mRS]) were compared between the two groups while checking for propensity score, matched-propensity score and by inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) propensity score method.ResultsFavorable outcome (mRS 0 to 2) was more frequently achieved after IVT+MT (n=523, 53.6%) than after MT alone (n=222, 41.8%) with an unadjusted odds ratio (OR) for bridging therapy of 1.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1. 29 to 2.01). This difference remained not significant in matched-propensity score cohort (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.63) although it remained according to adjusted propensity score (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.68) and IPTW (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.73) analyses. A significant difference was found in terms of excellent outcome (mRS 0 to 1) (adjusted OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.11) and successful reperfusion (adjusted OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.33 to 2.15). No differences in intracerebral hemorrhage or in allcause mortality within 90 days were found between groups.Conclusions IVT prior to MT is associated with increased excellent outcome and successful reperfusion rates. These findings support the use of bridging therapy.
| S-EPMC6186914 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeMechanical thrombectomy (MT) is the first-line treatment in acute stroke patients presenting with large vessel occlusion (LVO). The efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) prior to MT is being contested. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of MT without IVT in patients with no contraindications to IVT presenting directly to a tertiary stroke center with acute anterior circulation LVO.Materials and methodsWe collected the data of 106 acute stroke patients who underwent MT in a single high-volume stroke center. Patients with anterior circulation LVO eligible for IVT and directly admitted to our institution who subsequently underwent MT were included. We recorded baseline clinical, laboratory, procedural, and imaging variables and technical, imaging, and clinical outcomes. The effect of intravenous thrombolysis on 3-month clinical outcome (mRS) was analyzed with univariate tests and binary and ordinal logistic regression analysis.ResultsFifty-eight out of the 106 patients received IVT + MT. These patients had 2.6-fold higher odds of poorer clinical outcome in mRS shift analysis (p = 0.01) compared to MT-only patients who had excellent 3-month clinical outcome (mRS 0-1) three times more often (p = 0.009). There were no significant differences between the groups in process times, mTICI, or number of hemorrhagic complications. A trend of less distal embolization and higher number of device passes was observed among the MT-only patients.ConclusionsMT without prior IVT was associated with an improved overall three-month clinical outcome in acute anterior circulation LVO patients.
| S-EPMC7987593 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Large vessel ischemic stroke represents the most disabling subtype. While t-PA and endovascular thrombectomy can recanalize the occluded vessel, good clinical outcomes are not uniformly achieved. We propose that supplementing endovascular thrombectomy with superselective intra-arterial (IA) verapamil immediately following recanalization could be safe and effective. Verapamil, a calcium channel blocker, has been shown to be an effective IA adjunct in a pre-clinical mouse focal ischemia model. To demonstrate translational efficacy, mechanism, feasibility, and safety, we conducted a group of translational experiments. We performed in vivo IA dose-response evaluation in our animal stroke model with C57/Bl6 mice. We evaluated neuroprotective mechanism through in vitro primary cortical neuron (PCN) cultures. Finally, we performed a Phase I trial, SAVER-I, to evaluate feasibility and safety of administration in the human condition. IA verapamil has a likely plateau or inverted-U dose-response with a defined toxicity level in mice (LD50 16-17.5?mg/kg). Verapamil significantly prevented PCN death and deleterious ischemic effects. Finally, the SAVER-I clinical trial showed no evidence that IA verapamil increased the risk of intracranial hemorrhage or other adverse effect/procedural complication in human subjects. We conclude that superselective IA verapamil administration immediately following thrombectomy is safe and feasible, and has direct, dose-response-related benefits in ischemia.
| S-EPMC5669346 | biostudies-literature