Background: Decisions to treat large-vessel
occlusion with endovascular therapy(EVT) or intravenous alteplase depend on
how physicians weigh benefits against risks when considering patients’
pre-stroke comorbidities. Methods: In an
international survey, experts chose treatment approaches under current
resources and under assumed ideal conditions for 10 of 22 randomly assigned
case-scenarios. Five included comorbidities(metastatic/non-metastatic
cancer, cardiac/respiratory/renal disease, non-disabling/mild cognitive
impairment[MCI], physical dependence). We examined scenario/respondent
characteristics associated with EVT/alteplase decisions using multivariable
logistic regressions. Results: Among 607
physicians(38 countries), EVT was favoured in 1,097/1,379(79.6%) responses
for comorbidity-related scenarios under current resources versus
1,510/1,657(91.1%,OR:0.38, 95%CI.0.31-0.47) for six “level-1A” scenarios
(assuming ideal conditions:82.7% vs 95.1%,OR:0.25,0.19-0.33). However, this
was reversed on including all other scenarios(e.g. under current
resources:3,489/4,691[74.4%], OR:1.34,1.17-1.54). Responses favouring
alteplase for comorbidity-related(e.g.75.0% under current resources)
scenarios were comparable to level-1A scenarios(72.2%) and higher than all
others(60.4%). No comorbidity-related factor independently diminished
EVT-odds. MCI and dependence carried higher alteplase-odds; cancer and
cardiac/respiratory/renal disease had lower odds. Relevant respondent
characteristics included performing more EVT cases/year (higher EVT, lower
alteplase-odds), practicing in East-Asia (higher EVT-odds), and in
interventional neuroradiology(lower alteplase-odds vs neurology).
Conclusions: Moderate-to-severe comorbidities did
not consistently deter experts from EVT, suggesting equipoise about
withholding EVT based on comorbidities. However, alteplase was often
foregone when respondents chose EVT.