Reader response: Comparative safety and efficacy of combined IVT and MT with direct MT in large vessel occlusion

ObjectiveIn this multicenter study, we sought to evaluate comparative safety and efficacy of combined IV thrombolysis (IVT) and mechanical thrombectomy (MT) vs direct MT in emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO) patients.MethodsConsecutive ELVO patients treated with MT at 6 high-volume endovascular centers were evaluated. Standard safety and efficacy outcomes (successful reperfusion [modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction IIb/III], functional independence [FI] [modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0–2 at 3 months], favorable functional outcome [mRS of 0–1 at 3 months], functional improvement [mRS shift by 1-point decrease in mRS score]) were compared between patients who underwent combined IVT and MT vs MT alone. Additional propensity score–matched analyses were performed.ResultsA total of 292 and 277 patients were treated with combination therapy and direct MT, respectively. The combination therapy group had greater functional improvement (p = 0.037) at 3 months. After propensity score matching, 104 patients in the direct MT group were matched to 208 patients in the combination therapy group. IVT pretreatment was independently (p < 0.05) associated with higher odds of FI (odds ratio [OR] 1.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02–2.99) and functional improvement (common OR 1.64; 95% CI 1.05–2.56). Combination therapy was independently (p < 0.05) related to lower likelihood of 3-month mortality (0.50; 95% CI 0.26–0.96).ConclusionsThis observational study provides preliminary evidence that IVT pretreatment may improve outcomes in ELVO patients treated with MT. The question of the potential effect of IVT on ELVO patients treated with MT should be addressed with a randomized controlled trial.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class III evidence that for stroke patients with emergent large vessel occlusion, combined IVT and MT is superior to direct MT in improving functional outcomes.

Download Full-text

Sonothrombolysis in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke With Large Vessel Occlusion: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis

Stroke ◽

10.1161/strokeaha.120.030960 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Georgios Tsivgoulis ◽

Aristeidis H. Katsanos ◽

Jürgen Eggers ◽

Vincent Larrue ◽

Lars Thomassen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

Individual Patient Data ◽

Intravenous Thrombolysis ◽

Large Vessel ◽

Large Vessel Occlusion ◽

Controlled Clinical Trials ◽

Vessel Occlusion ◽

Safety And Efficacy ◽

Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials ◽

Randomized Controlled

Background and Purpose: Evidence about the utility of ultrasound-enhanced thrombolysis (sonothrombolysis) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is conflicting. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of sonothrombolysis in patients with AIS with large vessel occlusion, by analyzing individual patient data of available randomized-controlled clinical trials. Methods: We included all available randomized-controlled clinical trials comparing sonothrombolysis with or without addition of microspheres (treatment group) to intravenous thrombolysis alone (control group) in patients with AIS with large vessel occlusion. The primary outcome measure was the rate of complete recanalization at 1 to 36 hours following intravenous thrombolysis initiation. We present crude odds ratios (ORs) and ORs adjusted for the predefined variables of age, sex, baseline stroke severity, systolic blood pressure, and onset-to-treatment time. Results: We included 7 randomized controlled clinical trials that enrolled 1102 patients with AIS. A total of 138 and 134 confirmed large vessel occlusion patients were randomized to treatment and control groups respectively. Patients randomized to sonothrombolysis had increased odds of complete recanalization compared with patients receiving intravenous thrombolysis alone (40.3% versus 22.4%; OR, 2.17 [95% CI, 1.03–4.54]; adjusted OR, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.02–5.34]). The likelihood of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was not significantly different between the 2 groups (7.3% versus 3.7%; OR, 2.03 [95% CI, 0.68–6.11]; adjusted OR, 2.55 [95% CI, 0.76–8.52]). No differences in the likelihood of asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, 3-month favorable functional and 3-month functional independence were documented. Conclusions: Sonothrombolysis was associated with a nearly 2-fold increase in the odds of complete recanalization compared with intravenous thrombolysis alone in patients with AIS with large vessel occlusions. Further study of the safety and efficacy of sonothrombolysis is warranted.

Download Full-text