Repeated Endovascular Thrombectomy in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke in a Single Center

Introduction: The management and prognosis of acute ischemic stroke due to multiple large-vessel occlusion (LVO) (MLVO) are not well scrutinized. We therefore aimed to elucidate the differences in patient characteristics and prognosis of MLVO and single LVO (SLVO). Methods: The Recovery by Endovascular Salvage for Cerebral Ultra-Acute Embolism Japan Registry 2 (RESCUE-Japan Registry 2) enrolled 2,420 consecutive patients with acute LVO who were admitted within 24 h of onset. We compared patient prognosis between MLVO and SLVO in the favorable outcome, defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ≤2, and in mortality at 90 days by adjusting for confounders. Additionally, we stratified MLVO patients into tandem occlusion and different territories, according to the occlusion site information and also examined their characteristics. Results: Among the 2,399 patients registered, 124 (5.2%) had MLVO. Although there was no difference between the 2 groups in terms of hypertension as a risk factor, the mean arterial pressure on admission was significantly higher in MLVO (115 vs. 107 mm Hg, p = 0.004). MLVO in different territories was more likely to be cardioembolic (42.1 vs. 10.4%, p = 0.0002), while MLVO in tandem occlusion was more likely to be atherothrombotic (39.5 vs. 81.3%, p < 0.0001). Among MLVO, tandem occlusion had a significantly longer onset-to-door time than different territories (200 vs. 95 min, p = 0.02); accordingly, the tissue plasminogen activator administration was significantly less in tandem occlusion (22.4 vs. 47.9%, p = 0.003). However, interestingly, the endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) was performed significantly more in tandem occlusion (63.2 vs. 41.7%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1–5.0). The type of MLVO was the only and significant factor associated with EVT performance in multivariate analysis. The favorable outcomes were obtained less in MLVO than in SLVO (28.2 vs. 37.1%; aOR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.30–0.76). The mortality rate was not significantly different between MLVO and SLVO (8.9 vs. 11.1%, p = 0.42). Discussion/Conclusion: The prognosis of MLVO was significantly worse than that of SLVO. In different territories, we might be able to consider more aggressive EVT interventions.

Download Full-text

Abstract WP9: Primary Aspiration Thrombectomy in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Single-Center Experience

Stroke ◽

10.1161/str.48.suppl_1.wp9 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 48 (suppl_1) ◽

Author(s):

Ganesh Asaithambi ◽

Amy L Castle ◽

Lana J Stein ◽

Sandra K Hanson ◽

Jeffrey P Lassig

Keyword(s):

Ischemic Stroke ◽

Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽

National Institutes Of Health ◽

Stroke Severity ◽

Single Center ◽

Aspiration Thrombectomy ◽

Discharge Disposition ◽

Single Center Experience ◽

Symptomatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage ◽

Stent Retrievers

Background: Recent endovascular stroke studies utilizing primarily stent retrievers have proven clinical benefit among eligible patients. It remains unclear if this benefit is exclusive to stent retrievers. We present the results of a single-center experience for patients undergoing primary aspiration thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Methods: A retrospective analysis of all AIS patients receiving primary aspiration thrombectomy from January 2014 to March 2016 was performed. We assessed stroke severity at admission and discharge as defined by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score (NIHSSS), median onset to puncture and onset to recanalization times, location of target vessel treated, rate of concurrent intravenous (IV) alteplase use, and rate of TICI 2b/3 reperfusion. Outcomes adjudicated included rates of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), favorable discharge disposition to home, and 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ≤2. Results: During the study period, 121 patients (mean age 68.7±16.5 years, 53.7% women) received primary aspiration thrombectomy for 124 occlusions (26% terminal internal carotid artery, 45% M1, 15% M2, 11% basilar artery, 3% other). Median admission NIHSSS was 19 [11, 22] and improved to 6 [1, 15] upon discharge. Median onset to puncture and onset to recanalization times were 258 [148, 371] and 300 [180, 409] minutes, respectively. The rate of TICI 2b/3 reperfusion was 84.7%, and 52% received adjunctive IV alteplase. Rates of favorable discharge to home was 28.9% and 90-day mRS ≤2 was 39.8%. Only one patient developed sICH. Conclusion: Our single-center experience shows that primary aspiration thrombectomy can yield both favorable angiographic and clinical outcomes with minimal adverse effect.

Download Full-text

Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Review of Imaging, Patient Selection, and Management in the Endovascular Era. Part II: Patient Selection, Endovascular Thrombectomy, and Postprocedure Management

Journal of Clinical Interventional Radiology ISVIR ◽

10.1055/s-0038-1675882 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 02 (03) ◽

pp. 169-183

Author(s):

Sharath Kumar G G ◽

Chinmay Nagesh

Keyword(s):

Ischemic Stroke ◽

Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽

Patient Selection ◽

Secondary Brain Injury ◽

Selection Methods ◽

Vessel Occlusion ◽

Endovascular Thrombectomy ◽

Advantages And Disadvantages ◽

Imaging Patient ◽

Selection Of

AbstractAppropriate patient selection and expedient recanalization are the mainstay of modern management of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Only a minority of patients (7–15%) of patients are eligible for endovascular therapy. Patient selection may be time based or perfusion based. Central to both paradigms is the selection of a patient with a small core, a significant penumbra that can be differentiated from areas of oligemia. A brief review of patient selection methods is presented. Endovascular thrombectomy techniques using stentrievers or aspiration catheters have now become the treatment of choice for AIS with large vessel occlusion. A range of devices, each with its own advantages and disadvantages, are available in the market for the neurointerventionist to choose. Techniques vary between devices and between operators, but standardization and protocolization are important within each center. Complications must be anticipated to be avoided. Once reperfusion is achieved, outcomes must be safeguarded with competent postprocedure management to prevent secondary brain injury. These aspects are reviewed in this article.

Download Full-text