Thrombectomy Alone or Alongside Intravenous Thrombolysis in Managing Acute Ischemic Stroke Caused by Basilar Artery Occlusion: A Multicenter Observational Study.

Mo Yang, Yue-Zhou Cao, Peng-Hua Lv, Yasuo Ding, Zhensheng Liu, Zhenyu Jia, Lin-Bo Zhao, Chuan Xu, Hai-Bin Shi, Sheng Liu
{"title":"Thrombectomy Alone or Alongside Intravenous Thrombolysis in Managing Acute Ischemic Stroke Caused by Basilar Artery Occlusion: A Multicenter Observational Study.","authors":"Mo Yang, Yue-Zhou Cao, Peng-Hua Lv, Yasuo Ding, Zhensheng Liu, Zhenyu Jia, Lin-Bo Zhao, Chuan Xu, Hai-Bin Shi, Sheng Liu","doi":"10.3174/ajnr.A8520","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>It remains unclear whether the combination of endovascular treatment (EVT) with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) results in a more favorable functional outcome than EVT alone in managing cases of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) caused by basilar artery occlusion (BAO). Thus, this study aimed to compare the outcomes of 2 approaches-direct endovascular treatment (DEVT) and bridging therapy (IVT plus EVT)-in patients with acute BAO presenting within 4.5 hours of stroke onset.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This multicenter retrospective cohort study included 153 patients with acute BAO presenting within 4.5 hours of stroke onset. Of these patients, 65 (42.5%) and 88 (57.5%) underwent DEVT and bridging therapy, respectively. The primary outcome was defined as good functional outcome (mRS, 0-3) at 90 days. Additionally, preoperative clinical features, thrombectomy attempts, successful reperfusion rates, incidences of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and mortality were compared between the 2 groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At 90 days, the rate of good functional outcome was comparable between the DEVT (44.6%) and bridging-therapy (39.8%) groups (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.12; 95% CI, 0.55-2.31; <i>P</i> = .753). The bridging-therapy group exhibited a lower percentage of patients requiring ≥3 attempts of stent retrieval (aOR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16-0.93; <i>P</i> = .034). Preoperative clinical features, rate of successful reperfusion, sICH, and mortality were similar between the 2 groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with BAO-induced AIS, DEVT demonstrates a comparable functional outcome to bridging therapy within 4.5 hours of symptom onset, but IVT reduces the number of thrombectomy attempts.</p>","PeriodicalId":93863,"journal":{"name":"AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology","volume":" ","pages":"706-711"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A8520","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose: It remains unclear whether the combination of endovascular treatment (EVT) with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) results in a more favorable functional outcome than EVT alone in managing cases of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) caused by basilar artery occlusion (BAO). Thus, this study aimed to compare the outcomes of 2 approaches-direct endovascular treatment (DEVT) and bridging therapy (IVT plus EVT)-in patients with acute BAO presenting within 4.5 hours of stroke onset.

Materials and methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study included 153 patients with acute BAO presenting within 4.5 hours of stroke onset. Of these patients, 65 (42.5%) and 88 (57.5%) underwent DEVT and bridging therapy, respectively. The primary outcome was defined as good functional outcome (mRS, 0-3) at 90 days. Additionally, preoperative clinical features, thrombectomy attempts, successful reperfusion rates, incidences of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and mortality were compared between the 2 groups.

Results: At 90 days, the rate of good functional outcome was comparable between the DEVT (44.6%) and bridging-therapy (39.8%) groups (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.12; 95% CI, 0.55-2.31; P = .753). The bridging-therapy group exhibited a lower percentage of patients requiring ≥3 attempts of stent retrieval (aOR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16-0.93; P = .034). Preoperative clinical features, rate of successful reperfusion, sICH, and mortality were similar between the 2 groups.

Conclusions: In patients with BAO-induced AIS, DEVT demonstrates a comparable functional outcome to bridging therapy within 4.5 hours of symptom onset, but IVT reduces the number of thrombectomy attempts.

单用血栓切除术或同时使用静脉溶栓治疗基底动脉闭塞引起的急性缺血性脑卒中:一项多中心观察研究。
背景和目的:在处理基底动脉闭塞(BAO)引起的急性缺血性卒中(AIS)病例时,血管内治疗(EVT)与静脉溶栓(IVT)联合使用是否比单独使用 EVT 更能获得良好的功能预后,目前仍不清楚。因此,本研究旨在比较两种方法--直接 EVT(DEVT)和桥接疗法(IVT 加 EVT)--对卒中发生后 4.5 小时内就诊的急性 BAO 患者的治疗效果:这项多中心回顾性队列研究纳入了 153 名在卒中发生 4.5 小时内就诊的急性 BAO 患者。在这些患者中,分别有 65 人(42.5%)和 88 人(57.5%)接受了 DEVT 和桥接疗法。主要结果定义为 90 天后的良好功能预后(改良 Rankin 量表,0-3)。此外,还比较了两组患者的术前临床特征、血栓切除尝试、再灌注成功率、症状性颅内出血(sICH)发生率和死亡率:90天后,DEVT组(44.6%)和桥接疗法组(39.8%)的良好功能预后率相当(调整赔率比[aOR],1.12;95%置信区间[CI],0.55-2.31;P = 0.753)。桥接疗法组需要进行≥3次支架取出尝试的患者比例较低(aOR,0.39;95% CI,0.16-0.93;p = 0.034)。两组患者的术前临床特征、再灌注成功率、sICH和死亡率相似:结论:在BAO诱发的AIS患者中,DEVT在症状出现后4.5小时内显示出与桥接疗法相当的功能结果,但IVT减少了血栓切除尝试的次数:缩写:AIS,急性缺血性卒中;LVO,大血管闭塞;EVT,血管内治疗;IVT,静脉溶栓;BAO,基底动脉闭塞;DEVT,直接血管内治疗;sICH,症状性颅内出血;RCT,随机对照试验;IRIS,改善缺血性卒中再灌注策略;TOAST,ORG 10172急性卒中治疗试验;mTICI,改良脑梗塞溶栓治疗;SD,标准差;IQR,四分位间范围;ICAS,颅内动脉粥样硬化性狭窄。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信