Dataset Information

Endovascular therapy versus intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection ischemic stroke - Results from the SWISS registry.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

In patients with stroke attributable to cervical artery dissection, we compared endovascular therapy to intravenous thrombolysis regarding three-month outcome, recanalisation and complications.

Materials and methods

In a multicentre intravenous thrombolysis/endovascular therapy-register-based cohort study, all consecutive cervical artery dissection patients with intracranial artery occlusion treated within 6?h were eligible for analysis. Endovascular therapy patients (with or without prior intravenous thrombolysis) were compared to intravenous thrombolysis patients regarding (i) excellent three-month outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0-1), (ii) symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, (iii) recanalisation of the occluded intracranial artery and (iv) death. Upon a systematic literature review, we performed a meta-analysis comparing endovascular therapy to intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection patients regarding three-month outcome using a random-effects Mantel-Haenszel model.

Results

Among 62 cervical artery dissection patients (median age 48.8 years), 24 received intravenous thrombolysis and 38 received endovascular therapy. Excellent three-month outcome occurred in 23.7% endovascular therapy and 20.8% with intravenous thrombolysis patients. Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage occurred solely among endovascular therapy patients (5/38 patients, 13.2%) while four (80%) of these patients had bridging therapy; 6/38 endovascular therapy and 0/24 intravenous thrombolysis patients died. Four of these 6 endovascular therapy patients had bridging therapy. Recanalisation was achieved in 84.2% endovascular therapy patients and 66.7% intravenous thrombolysis patients (odds ratio 3.2, 95% confidence interval [0.9-11.38]). Sensitivity analyses in a subgroup treated within 4.5?h revealed a higher recanalisation rate among endovascular therapy patients (odds ratio 3.87, 95% confidence interval [1.00-14.95]), but no change in the key clinical findings. In a meta-analysis across eight studies (n?=?212 patients), cervical artery dissection patients (110 intravenous thrombolysis and 102 endovascular therapy) showed identical odds for favourable outcome (odds ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval [0.38-2.44]) among endovascular therapy patients and intravenous thrombolysis patients.

Discussion and conclusion

In this cohort study, there was no clear signal of superiority of endovascular therapy over intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection patients, which - given the limitation of our sample size - does not prove that endovascular therapy in these patients cannot be superior in future studies. The observation that symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage and deaths in the endovascular therapy group occurred predominantly in bridging patients requires further investigation.

SUBMITTER: Traenka C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6453244 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Endovascular therapy versus intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection ischemic stroke - Results from the SWISS registry.

Traenka Christopher C Jung Simon S Gralla Jan J Kurmann Rebekka R Stippich Christoph C Simonetti Barbara Goeggel BG Gensicke Henrik H Mueller Hubertus H Lovblad Karl K Eskandari Ashraf A Puccinelli Francesco F Vehoff Jochen J Weber Johannes J Wegener Susanne S Steiner Levke L Kägi Georg G Luft Andreas A Sztajzel Roman R Fischer Urs U Bonati Leo H LH Peters Nils N Michel Patrik P Lyrer Philippe A PA Arnold Marcel M Engelter Stefan T ST

European stroke journal 20180103 1

<h4>Introduction</h4>In patients with stroke attributable to cervical artery dissection, we compared endovascular therapy to intravenous thrombolysis regarding three-month outcome, recanalisation and complications.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>In a multicentre intravenous thrombolysis/endovascular therapy-register-based cohort study, all consecutive cervical artery dissection patients with intracranial artery occlusion treated within 6 h were eligible for analysis. Endovascular therapy patients ...[more]

PMID: 31008337

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:Background and purpose: It is unclear whether endovascular thrombectomy alone compared with intravenous thrombolysis combination with endovascular thrombectomy can achieve similar neurological outcomes in patients with acute large vessel occlusion stroke. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare endovascular thrombectomy alone or intravenous thrombolysis plus endovascular thrombectomy in this population. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We restricted our search to randomized clinical trials that examined the clinical outcomes of endovascular thrombectomy alone vs. intravenous thrombolysis plus endovascular thrombectomy. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess study quality. Random-effects meta-analyses were used for evaluating all outcomes. Results: Total three randomized controlled trials with 1,092 individuals enrolled were included in the meta-analysis, including 543 (49.7%) who received endovascular thrombectomy alone and 549 (50.3%) who received intravenous thrombolysis plus endovascular thrombectomy. The primary outcome of 90-day functional independence (modified Rankin scale (mRS) score ≤ 2) was 44.6% (242/543) in the endovascular thrombectomy alone group vs. 42.8% (235/549) in the alteplase with endovascular thrombectomy group (odds ratio (OR), 1.08 [95% CI, 0.85-1.38]; P = 0.0539). Among pre-specified secondary outcomes, no significant between-group differences were found in excellent outcome (mRS score ≤ 1) (OR, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.85-1.47]; P = 0.418), mortality at 90 days (OR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.68-1.29]; P = 0.673), successful reperfusion (thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 2b-3) (OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.54-1.05]; P = 0.099), and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.45-1.15]; P = 0.171). Conclusions: Among patients with acute ischemic stroke in the anterior circulation within 4.5 h from the onset, endovascular thrombectomy alone was non-inferior to combined intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular thrombectomy.

Project description:ObjectivesThe benefit of intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) therapy for very old patients with acute ischemic stroke remains unclear. The aim of this study was to elucidate the efficacy and safety of intravenous rt-PA therapy for patients over 80 years old.MethodsOf 13,521 stroke patients registered in the Fukuoka Stroke Registry in Japan from June 1999 to February 2013, 953 ischemic stroke patients who were over 80 years old, hospitalized within 3 h of onset, and not treated with endovascular therapy were included in this study. Among them, 153 patients were treated with intravenous rt-PA (0.6 mg/kg). For propensity score (PS)-matched case-control analysis, 148 patients treated with rt-PA and 148 PS-matched patients without rt-PA therapy were selected by 1:1 matching with propensity for using rt-PA. Clinical outcomes were neurological improvement, good functional outcome at discharge, in-hospital mortality, and hemorrhagic complications (any intracranial hemorrhage [ICH], symptomatic ICH, and gastrointestinal bleeding).ResultsIn the full cohort of 953 patients, rt-PA use was associated positively with neurological improvement and good functional outcome, and negatively with in-hospital mortality after adjustment for multiple confounding factors. In PS-matched case-control analysis, patients treated with rt-PA were still at lower risk for unfavorable clinical outcomes than non-treated patients (neurological improvement, odds ratio 2.67, 95% confidence interval 1.61-4.40; good functional outcome, odds ratio 2.23, 95% confidence interval 1.16-4.29; in-hospital mortality, odds ratio 0.30, 95% confidence interval 0.13-0.65). There was no significant association between rt-PA use and risk of hemorrhagic complications in the full and PS-matched cohorts.ConclusionsIntravenous rt-PA therapy was associated with improved clinical outcomes without significant increase in risk of hemorrhagic complications in very old patients (aged>80 years) with acute ischemic stroke.

Project description:BackgroundThe impact of COVID-19 on clinical outcomes in acute ischemic stroke patients receiving reperfusion therapy remains unclear. We therefore aimed to synthesize the available evidence to investigate the safety and short-term efficacy of reperfusion therapy in this patient population.MethodsWe searched the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library Reviews for randomized controlled trials and observational studies that investigated the use of intravenous thrombolysis, endovascular therapy, or a combination of both in acute ischemic stroke patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, compared to controls. Our primary safety outcomes included any intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH and all-cause in-hospital mortality. Short-term favorable functional outcomes were assessed at discharge and at 3 months. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model. Heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran's Q test and I2 statistics.ResultsWe included 11 studies with a total of 477 COVID-19 positive and 8,092 COVID-19 negative ischemic stroke patients who underwent reperfusion therapy. COVID-19 positive patients exhibited a significantly higher risk of experiencing any ICH (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.16-2.05, p < 0.001), while the nominally increased risk of symptomatic ICH in these patients did not reach statistical significance (RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.97-4.31; p = 0.06). COVID-19 positive stroke patients also had a significantly higher in-hospital mortality compared to COVID-19 negative stroke patients (RR 2.78, 95% CI 2.15-3.59, p < 0.001). Moreover, COVID-19 positive stroke patients were less likely to achieve a favorable functional outcome at discharge (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.51-0.86, p < 0.001) compared to COVID-19 negative patients, but this difference was not observed at 3-month follow-up (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.14-2.91, p = 0.56).ConclusionCOVID-19 appears to have an adverse impact on acute ischemic stroke patients who undergo reperfusion therapy, leading to an elevated risk of any ICH, higher mortality and lower likelihood of favorable functional outcome.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO, identifier CRD42022309785.

Project description:PurposeThe Thrombolysis in Ischemic Stroke Patients (TRISP) collaboration was a concerted effort initiated in 2010 with the purpose to address relevant research questions about the effectiveness and safety of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT). The collaboration also aims to prospectively collect data on patients undergoing endovascular treatment (EVT) and hence the name of the collaboration was changed from TRISP to EVA-TRISP. The methodology of the former TRISP registry for patients treated with IVT has already been published. This paper focuses on describing the EVT part of the registry.ParticipantsAll centres committed to collecting predefined variables on consecutive patients prospectively. We aim for accuracy and completeness of the data and to adapt local databases to investigate novel research questions. Herein, we introduce the methodology of a recently constructed academic investigator-initiated open collaboration EVT registry built as an extension of an existing IVT registry in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS).Findings to dateCurrently, the EVA-TRISP network includes 20 stroke centres with considerable expertise in EVT and maintenance of high-quality hospital-based registries. Following several successful randomised controlled trials (RCTs), many important clinical questions remain unanswered in the (EVT) field and some of them will unlikely be investigated in future RCTs. Prospective registries with high-quality data on EVT-treated patients may help answering some of these unanswered issues, especially on safety and efficacy of EVT in specific patient subgroups.Future plansThis collaborative effort aims at addressing clinically important questions on safety and efficacy of EVT in conditions not covered by RCTs. The TRISP registry generated substantial novel data supporting stroke physicians in their daily decision making considering IVT candidate patients. While providing observational data on EVT in daily clinical practice, our future findings may likewise be hypothesis generating for future research as well as for quality improvement (on EVT). The collaboration welcomes participation of further centres willing to fulfill the commitment and the outlined requirements.

Dataset Information

Endovascular therapy versus intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection ischemic stroke - Results from the SWISS registry.

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Discussion and conclusion

Publications

Endovascular therapy versus intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection ischemic stroke - Results from the SWISS registry.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets