Project description:BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Mechanical thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke within 6 hours of symptom onset is effective and safe. However, in many patients, information on the beginning of symptoms is not available. Patients can be divided into those with wake-up stroke and daytime-unwitnessed stroke. Evidence on outcome and complications after mechanical thrombectomy in wake-up stroke and daytime-unwitnessed stroke is rare. A potential beneficial effect of mechanical thrombectomy in selected patients with wake-up stroke or daytime-unwitnessed stroke is suspected. MATERIALS AND METHODS:We analyzed 1073 patients with anterior circulation stroke undergoing mechanical thrombectomy between 2010 and 2016. Patients with wake-up stroke and daytime-unwitnessed stroke were compared with controls receiving mechanical thrombectomy as the standard of care. We assessed good functional outcome (mRS ≤ 2 at 3 months), mortality rates, and frequencies of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Subgroup analyses tried to detect influences of patient selection via further imaging modalities (MR imaging, CTP; wake-up stroke [advanced], daytime-unwitnessed stroke [advanced]) on outcome and safety. RESULTS:There was no significant difference in good functional outcome between patients with wake-up stroke and controls (35.9% versus 38.3%, P = .625). Outcome in patients with daytime-unwitnessed stroke was inferior compared with controls (27.3%, P = .007). Groups did not differ in all-cause mortality at day 90 (P = .224) and the rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (P = .292). Advanced imaging improved the frequency of good functional outcome (non-wake-up stroke [advanced] versus wake-up stroke [advanced]: OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.32-6.45; non-daytime-unwitnessed stroke [advanced] versus daytime-unwitnessed stroke [advanced]: OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.03-4.25) with an additional reduction in all-cause mortality (non-daytime-unwitnessed stroke [advanced] versus daytime-unwitnessed stroke [advanced]: OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.20-0.88). CONCLUSIONS:Mechanical thrombectomy in selected patients with wake-up stroke allows a good functional outcome comparable with that of controls. Outcome after mechanical thrombectomy in daytime-unwitnessed stroke seems to be inferior compared with that in controls. Advanced imaging modalities may increase the frequency of good functional outcome in both patients with wake-up stroke and daytime-unwitnessed stroke.

Project description:ObjectivesWake-up stroke is an important clinical problem that may account for a quarter of all ischemic strokes. This study aimed to establish the safety and efficacy of intravenous thrombolytic treatment of wake-up strokes by comparing it to the standard thrombolysis treatment in strokes with clear onsets and wake-up strokes that did not receive reperfusion therapy.MethodsThis retrospective study enrolled 95 patients with ischemic strokes who underwent thrombolytic treatment with alteplase, including nine patients with wake-up strokes. The safety profile (mortality and intracranial bleeding) and efficacy (clinical and functional outcomes on admission, discharge, and 90 days after stroke onset) were evaluated.ResultsWhen assessed using the modified Rankin scale (mRs), the patients with wake-up strokes had significantly more favorable functional outcomes on discharge when compared to those who received standard thrombolysis (p = .0289). No significant differences were noted when the favorable outcome rate (mRs score = 0-2) at three months post-thrombolysis (Odds ratio [OR] = 2.07; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.41-10.6; p = .3807) and safety outcomes (death during hospitalization: OR = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.03-9.11; p = .6295 and intracranial bleeding 24 hr after treatment: OR = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.02-7.58; p = .5707) were compared between the two groups. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenchel shift analysis showed a significantly more favorable distribution of the mRs scores at three months after the stroke onset in the patients with wake-up strokes who were treated with alteplase compared to those who did not receive thrombolysis (OR = 1.42; 95% CI = 1.01-1.82; p = .0426).ConclusionsOur study demonstrated that in patients who awaken with stroke symptoms, intravenous thrombolytic treatment is a safe procedure that may lead to favorable outcomes. Further studies should be performed to increase the size of the group of patients with wake-up strokes who can be treated with reperfusion therapy.

Project description:BackgroundMost ischaemic strokes are caused by blockage of a cerebral artery by a thrombus. Intravenous administration of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator given within 4.5 hours is now standard treatment for this condition. Percutaneous vascular interventions use an intra-arterial, mechanical approach for thrombus disruption or removal (thrombectomy). Recent randomised trials indicate that percutaneous vascular interventions are superior to usual care (usual care usually included intravenous thrombolysis). However, intravenous thrombolysis was usually given in both arms of the trial and there was a lack of direct comparison of percutaneous vascular interventions with intravenous thrombolysis.ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness and safety of percutaneous vascular interventions compared with intravenous thrombolytic treatment for acute ischaemic stroke.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last search: August 2018). In addition, in September 2017, we searched the following electronic databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index; and Stroke Trials Registry, and US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) that directly compared a percutaneous vascular intervention with intravenous thrombolytic treatment in people with acute ischaemic stroke.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We obtained both published and unpublished data. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.Main resultsWe included four trials with 450 participants. Data on functional outcome and death at end of follow-up were available for 443 participants from three trials. Compared with intravenous thrombolytic therapy, percutaneous vascular intervention did not improve the proportion of participants with good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 2, risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.25, P = 0.92). The quality of evidence was low (outcome assessment was blinded, but not the treating physician or participants). At the end of follow-up, there was a non-significant increase in the proportion of participants who died in the percutaneous vascular intervention group (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.14, P = 0.21). The quality of evidence was low (wide confidence interval). There was no difference in the proportion of participants with symptomatic intracranial haemorrhages between the intervention and control groups (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.95, P = 0.97). The quality of evidence was low (wide confidence interval). Data on vascular status (recanalisation rate) were only available for seven participants from one trial; we considered this inadequate for statistical analyses.Authors' conclusionsThe present review directly compared intravenous thrombolytic treatment with percutaneous vascular interventions for ischaemic stroke. We found no evidence from RCTs that percutaneous vascular interventions are superior to intravenous thrombolytic treatment with respect to functional outcome. Quality of evidence was low (outcome assessment was blinded, but not the treating physician or participants). New trials with adequate sample sizes are warranted because of the rapid development of new techniques and devices for such interventions.

Project description:BackgroundMost disabling strokes are due to a blockage of a large artery in the brain by a blood clot. Prompt removal of the clot with intra-arterial thrombolytic drugs or mechanical devices, or both, can restore blood flow before major brain damage has occurred, leading to improved recovery. However, these so-called endovascular interventions can cause bleeding in the brain. This is a review of randomised controlled trials of endovascular thrombectomy or intra-arterial thrombolysis, or both, for acute ischaemic stroke.ObjectivesTo assess whether endovascular thrombectomy or intra-arterial interventions, or both, plus medical treatment are superior to medical treatment alone in people with acute ischaemic stroke.Search methodsWe searched the Trials Registers of the Cochrane Stroke Group and Cochrane Vascular Group (last searched 1 September 2020), CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library, 1 September 2020), MEDLINE (May 2010 to 1 September 2020), and Embase (May 2010 to 1 September 2020). We also searched trials registers, screened reference lists, and contacted researchers.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any endovascular intervention plus medical treatment compared with medical treatment alone in people with definite ischaemic stroke.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors (MBR and MJ) applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed trial quality. Two review authors (MBR and HL) assessed risk of bias, and the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We obtained both published and unpublished data if available. Our primary outcome was favourable functional outcome at the end of the scheduled follow-up period, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2. Eighteen trials (i.e. all but one included trial) reported their outcome at 90 days. Secondary outcomes were death from all causes at in the acute phase and by the end of follow-up, symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage in the acute phase and by the end of follow-up, neurological status at the end of follow-up, and degree of recanalisation.Main resultsWe included 19 studies with a total of 3793 participants. The majority of participants had large artery occlusion in the anterior circulation, and were treated within six hours of symptom onset with endovascular thrombectomy. Treatment increased the chance of achieving a good functional outcome, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2: risk ratio (RR) 1.50 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37 to 1.63; 3715 participants, 18 RCTs; high-certainty evidence). Treatment also reduced the risk of death at end of follow-up: RR 0.85 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.97; 3793 participants, 19 RCTs; high-certainty evidence) without increasing the risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage in the acute phase: RR 1.46 (95% CI 0.91 to 2.36; 1559 participants, 6 RCTs; high-certainty evidence) or by end of follow-up: RR 1.05 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.52; 1752 participants, 10 RCTs; high-certainty evidence); however, the wide confidence intervals preclude any firm conclusion. Neurological recovery to National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score 0 to 1 and degree of recanalisation rates were better in the treatment group: RR 2.03 (95% CI 1.21 to 3.40; 334 participants, 3 RCTs; high-certainty evidence) and RR 3.11 (95% CI 2.18 to 4.42; 268 participants, 3 RCTs; high-certainty evidence), respectively.Authors' conclusionsIn individuals with acute ischaemic stroke due to large artery occlusion in the anterior circulation, endovascular thrombectomy can increase the chance of survival with a good functional outcome without increasing the risk of intracerebral haemorrhage or death.

Project description:ObjectiveThe Pragmatic Ischaemic Thrombectomy Evaluation (PISTE) trial was a multicentre, randomised, controlled clinical trial comparing intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) alone with IVT and adjunctive intra-arterial mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in patients who had acute ischaemic stroke with large artery occlusive anterior circulation stroke confirmed on CT angiography (CTA).DesignEligible patients had IVT started within 4.5 hours of stroke symptom onset. Those randomised to additional MT underwent thrombectomy using any Conformité Européene (CE)-marked device, with target interval times for IVT start to arterial puncture of <90 min. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving independence defined by a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-2 at day 90.ResultsTen UK centres enrolled 65 patients between April 2013 and April 2015. Median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 16 (IQR 13-21). Median stroke onset to IVT start was 120 min. In the intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference in disability-free survival at day 90 with MT (absolute difference 11%, adjusted OR 2.12, 95% CI 0.65 to 6.94, p=0.20). Secondary analyses showed significantly greater likelihood of full neurological recovery (mRS 0-1) at day 90 (OR 7.6, 95% CI 1.6 to 37.2, p=0.010). In the per-protocol population (n=58), the primary and most secondary clinical outcomes significantly favoured MT (absolute difference in mRS 0-2 of 22% and adjusted OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.2 to 19.7, p=0.021).ConclusionsThe trial did not find a significant difference between treatment groups for the primary end point. However, the effect size was consistent with published data and across primary and secondary end points. Proceeding as fast as possible to MT after CTA confirmation of large artery occlusion on a background of intravenous alteplase is safe, improves excellent clinical outcomes and, in the per-protocol population, improves disability-free survival.Trial registration numberNCT01745692; Results.

Project description:BackgroundExisting data and clinical trials could not determine whether faster intravenous thrombolytic therapy (IVT) translates into better long-term functional outcomes after acute ischemic stroke among those treated with endovascular thrombectomy (EVT). Patient-level national data can provide the required large population to study the associations between earlier IVT, versus later, with longitudinal functional outcomes and mortality in patients receiving IVT+EVT combined treatment.MethodsThis cohort study included older US patients (age ≥65 years) who received IVT within 4.5 hours or EVT within 7 hours after acute ischemic stroke using the linked 2015 to 2018 Get With The Guidelines-Stroke and Medicare database (38 913 treated with IVT only and 3946 with IVT+EVT). Primary outcome was home time, a patient-prioritized functional outcome. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality in 1 year. Multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the associations between door-to-needle (DTN) times and outcomes.ResultsAmong patients treated with IVT+EVT, after adjusting for patient and hospital factors, including onset-to-EVT times, each 15-minute increase in DTN times for IVT was associated with significantly higher odds of zero home time in a year (never discharged to home) (adjusted odds ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.06-1.19]), less home time among those discharged to home (adjusted odds ratio, 0.93 per 1% of 365 days [95% CI, 0.89-0.98]), and higher all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.02-1.11]). These associations were also statistically significant among patients treated with IVT but at a modest degree (adjusted odds ratio, 1.04 for zero home time, 0.96 per 1% home time for those discharged to home, and adjusted hazard ratio 1.03 for mortality). In the secondary analysis where the IVT+EVT group was compared with 3704 patients treated with EVT only, shorter DTN times (≤60, 45, and 30 minutes) achieved incrementally more home time in a year, and more modified Rankin Scale 0 to 2 at discharge (22.3%, 23.4%, and 25.0%, respectively) versus EVT only (16.4%, P<0.001 for each). The benefit dissipated with DTN>60 minutes.ConclusionsAmong older patients with stroke treated with either IVT only or IVT+EVT, shorter DTN times are associated with better long-term functional outcomes and lower mortality. These findings support further efforts to accelerate thrombolytic administration in all eligible patients, including EVT candidates.

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:ObjectiveThe putative mechanism for the favourable effect of endovascular treatment (EVT) on functional outcome after acute ischaemic stroke is preventing follow-up infarct volume (FIV) progression. We aimed to assess to what extent difference in FIV explains the effect of EVT on functional outcome in a randomised trial of EVT versus no EVT (MR CLEAN).MethodsFIV was assessed on non-contrast CT scan 5-7 days after stroke. Functional outcome was the score on the modified Rankin Scale at 3 months. We tested the causal pathway from intervention, via FIV to functional outcome with a mediation model, using linear and ordinal regression, adjusted for relevant baseline covariates, including stroke severity. Explained effect was assessed by taking the ratio of the log odds ratios of treatment with and without adjustment for FIV.ResultsOf the 500 patients included in MR CLEAN, 60 died and four patients underwent hemicraniectomy before FIV was assessed, leaving 436 patients for analysis. Patients in the intervention group had better functional outcomes (adjusted common odds ratio (acOR) 2.30 (95% CI 1.62-3.26) than controls and smaller FIV (median 53 vs. 81 ml) (difference 28 ml; 95% CI 13-41). Smaller FIV was associated with better outcome (acOR per 10 ml 0.60, 95% CI 0.52-0.68). After adjustment for FIV the effect of intervention on functional outcome decreased but remained substantial (acOR 2.05, 95% CI 1.44-2.91). This implies that preventing FIV progression explains 14% (95% CI 0-34) of the beneficial effect of EVT on outcome.ConclusionThe effect of EVT on FIV explains only part of the treatment effect on functional outcome.Key points• Endovascular treatment in acute ischaemic stroke patients prevents progression of follow-up infarct volume on non-contrast CT at 5-7 days. • Follow-up infarct volume was related to functional outcome, but only explained a modest part of the effect of intervention on functional outcome. • A large proportion of treatment effect on functional outcome remains unexplained, suggesting FIV alone cannot be used as an early surrogate imaging marker of functional outcome.

Dataset Information

Intravenous thrombolytic treatment and endovascular thrombectomy for ischaemic wake-up stroke.

Publications

Intravenous thrombolytic treatment and endovascular thrombectomy for ischaemic wake-up stroke.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets