Abstract WP44: Comparison of Multi-modal CT Imaging Protocols Used for Decision-Making on Endovascular Treatment in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke

Stroke ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rujimas Khumtong ◽  
Timo Krings ◽  
Vitor M Pereira ◽  
Aleksandra Pikula ◽  
Joanna D Schaafsma
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Ct Imaging ◽  
Imaging Protocols

scholarly journals Impact of Multiphase Computed Tomography Angiography for Endovascular Treatment Decision-Making on Outcomes in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-387
Author(s):  
Johanna M. Ospel ◽  
Ondrej Volny ◽  
Wu Qiu ◽  
Mohamed Najm ◽  
Moiz Hafeez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Blood Flow ◽  
Cerebral Blood Flow ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Computed Tomography Angiography ◽  
Estimation Methods ◽  
Good Outcome

Background and Purpose Various imaging paradigms are used for endovascular treatment (EVT) decision-making and outcome estimation in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We aim to compare how these imaging paradigms perform for EVT patient selection and outcome estimation. Methods Prospective multi-center cohort study of patients with AIS symptoms with multi-phase computed tomography angiography (mCTA) and computed tomography perfusion (CTP) baseline imaging. mCTA-based EVT-eligibility was defined as presence of large vessel occlusion (LVO) and moderate-to-good collaterals on mCTA. CTP-based eligibility was defined as presence of LVO, ischemic core (defined on relative cerebral blood flow, absolute cerebral blood flow, and cerebral blood volume maps) <70 mL, mismatch-ratio >1.8, absolute mismatch >15 mL. EVT-eligibility and adjusted rates of good outcome (modified Rankin Scale 0–2) based on these imaging paradigms were compared.Results Of 289/464 patients with LVO, 263 (91%) were EVT-eligible by mCTA-criteria versus 63 (22%), 19 (7%) and 103 (36%) by rCBF, aCBF, and CBV-CTP-criteria. CTP and mCTA-criteria were discordant in 40% to 53%. Estimated outcomes were best in patients who met both mCTA and CTP eligibility-criteria and were treated with EVT (62% to 87% good outcome). Patients eligible for EVT by mCTA-criteria and not by CTP-criteria receiving EVT achieved good outcome rates of 53% to 57%. Few patients met CTP-criteria and not mCTA-criteria for EVT.Conclusions Simpler imaging selection criteria that rely on little else than detection of the occluded blood vessel may be more sensitive and less specific, thus resulting in more patients being offered EVT and arguably benefiting from it.

Abstract TP56: Endovascular Treatment Decisions in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients With Low Baseline Aspects: Insights From an International Multidisciplinary Survey

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna M Ospel ◽  
Nima Kashani ◽  
Bijoy Menon ◽  
Mohammed Almekhlafi ◽  
Ravinder Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Multivariable Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Acute Stroke Care ◽  
Early Management ◽  
Local Resources

Background and Purpose: Current AHA/ASA guidelines for the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke restrict level 1A recommendations for endovascular therapy (EVT) to patients with baseline ASPECTS score >5. However, a recent meta-analysis from the HERMES group showed a 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 an international multidisciplinary survey, 607 physicians involved in acute stroke care were randomly assigned 10 out of a pool of 22 case-scenarios, 3 of which involved patients with baseline ASPECTS < 6 (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 in the given scenario A) under their current local resources and B) under assumed ideal conditions, i.e. 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 variables associated with EVT decision in patients with low baseline ASPECTS. Results: 827/6070 responses were available for the low ASPECTS scenarios. Current and ideal treatment EVT decision rates were 57.1% and 57.6% respectively. Current and ideal decision rates were 69.9% and 60.4% for scenario A, 60.0% and 61.5% for scenario B, 41.3% and 40.2% for scenario C respectively. Annual center EVT volume (OR 1.004,p=.004), annual operator EVT volume (OR 1.009, p=.018) and time since symptom onset (OR 4.543,p<.001) were significantly associated with EVT decision-making under current local resources, while annual operator EVT volume (OR 1.007,p<.029) and time since symptom onset (OR 5.687,p<.001) were associated with decision-making under assumed ideal conditions. Conclusion: A majority of physicians decided to proceed with EVT despite low baseline ASPECTS. Operators and centers doing more EVT per year were more likely to offer EVT to patients with low ASPECTS.

Endovascular Treatment in Acute Ischemic Stroke - Three Years Clinical Experience

2014 ◽  
Vol 75 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Andonova ◽  
E. Kalevska ◽  
Ch. Bachvarov ◽  
Tz. Dimitrova ◽  
M. Petkova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Clinical Experience

scholarly journals Acute reperfusion therapies for acute ischemic stroke patients with unknown time of symptom onset or in extended time windows: an individualized approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 175628642110211
Author(s):  
Georgios Magoufis ◽  
Apostolos Safouris ◽  
Guy Raphaeli ◽  
Odysseas Kargiotis ◽  
Klearchos Psychogios ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Time Windows ◽  
Intravenous Thrombolysis ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Treatment Algorithms ◽  
Late Presenters

Recent randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have revolutionized acute ischemic stroke care by extending the use of intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular reperfusion therapies in time windows that have been originally considered futile or even unsafe. Both systemic and endovascular reperfusion therapies have been shown to improve outcome in patients with wake-up strokes or symptom onset beyond 4.5 h for intravenous thrombolysis and beyond 6 h for endovascular treatment; however, they require advanced neuroimaging to select stroke patients safely. Experts have proposed simpler imaging algorithms but high-quality data on safety and efficacy are currently missing. RCTs used diverse imaging and clinical inclusion criteria for patient selection during the dawn of this novel stroke treatment paradigm. After taking into consideration the dismal prognosis of nonrecanalized ischemic stroke patients and the substantial clinical benefit of reperfusion therapies in selected late presenters, we propose rescue reperfusion therapies for acute ischemic stroke patients not fulfilling all clinical and imaging inclusion criteria as an option in a subgroup of patients with clinical and radiological profiles suggesting low risk for complications, notably hemorrhagic transformation as well as local or remote parenchymal hemorrhage. Incorporating new data to treatment algorithms may seem perplexing to stroke physicians, since treatment and imaging capabilities of each stroke center may dictate diverse treatment pathways. This narrative review will summarize current data that will assist clinicians in the selection of those late presenters that will most likely benefit from acute reperfusion therapies. Different treatment algorithms are provided according to available neuroimaging and endovascular treatment capabilities.

scholarly journals Outcome of endovascular treatment within and beyond 6 h without perfusion software

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhen Jing ◽  
Hao Li ◽  
Shengming Huang ◽  
Min Guan ◽  
Yongxin Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Anterior Circulation ◽  
Vessel Occlusion ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

AbstractEndovascular treatment (EVT) has been accepted as the standard of care for patients with acute ischemic stroke. The aim of the present study was to compare clinical outcomes of patients who received EVT within and beyond 6 h from symptom onset to groin puncture without perfusion software in Guangdong district, China. Between March 2017 and May 2018, acute ischemic stroke patients who received EVT from 6 comprehensive stroke centers, were enrolled into the registry study. In this subgroup study, we included all patients who had acute proximal large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation. The demographic, clinical and neuroimaging data were collected from each center. A total of 192 patients were included in this subgroup study. They were divided into two groups: group A (n = 125), within 6 h; group B (n = 67), 6–24 h from symptom onset to groin puncture. There were no substantial differences between these two groups in terms of 90 days favorable outcome (modified Rankin scale [mRS] ≤ 2, P = 0.051) and mortality (P = 0.083), and the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage at 24 h (P = 0.425). The NIHSS (median 16, IQR12-20, group A; median 12, IQR8-18, group B; P = 0.009) and ASPECTS (median 10, IQR8-10, group A; median 9, IQR8-10, group B; P = 0.034) at baseline were higher in group A. The anesthesia method (general anesthesia, 21.3%, group A vs. 1.5% group B, P = 0.001) were also statistically different between the two groups. The NIHSS and ASPECTS were higher, and general anesthesia was also more widely used in group A. Clinical outcomes were not significantly different within 6 h versus 6–24 h from symptom onset to groin puncture in this real world study.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document