Endovascular Thrombectomy Versus Best Medical Therapy for Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke Beyond 24 Hours: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 8.9 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Aaron Rodriguez-Calienes, Nagheli Borjas, Sai Sanikommu, Fabian A Chavez-Ecos, Martha I Vilca-Salas, Pedro B Rodrigues, Cristian Morán-Mariños, Dileep R Yavagal, Negar Asdaghi, Santiago Ortega-Gutierrez
{"title":"Endovascular Thrombectomy Versus Best Medical Therapy for Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke Beyond 24 Hours: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Aaron Rodriguez-Calienes, Nagheli Borjas, Sai Sanikommu, Fabian A Chavez-Ecos, Martha I Vilca-Salas, Pedro B Rodrigues, Cristian Morán-Mariños, Dileep R Yavagal, Negar Asdaghi, Santiago Ortega-Gutierrez","doi":"10.1161/STROKEAHA.125.052121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The benefit of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) beyond 24 hours from last known well in acute ischemic stroke remains uncertain. Although some slow progressors may retain salvageable tissue, supporting evidence in this ultra-late window comes mainly from small observational studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central up to February 2025 for studies comparing EVT and best medical therapy in patients with acute ischemic stroke treated >24 hours from last known well. Eligible studies reported functional independence (90-day 0-2 modified Rankin Scale score), excellent clinical outcome (90-day 0-1 modified Rankin Scale score), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, or 90-day mortality. Pooled unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated using random-effects meta-analyses. Subgroup analyses were performed by study design, stroke severity, imaging modality, and occlusion territory. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic and the Cochran <i>Q</i> test, and the certainty of evidence (CoE) was assessed using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten observational studies (3 prospective and 7 retrospective) comprising 1871 patients (EVT: 866; best medical therapy: 1009) were included. EVT was associated with significantly higher odds of functional independence (8 studies; adjusted OR, 4.62 [95% CI, 3.30-6.47]; <i>I</i>²=0%; low CoE) and excellent clinical outcome (2 studies; adjusted OR, 5.68 [95% CI, 2.49-12.97]; <i>I</i>²=0%; very-low CoE). EVT increased the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (4 studies; adjusted OR, 9.54 [95% CI, 3.78-21.07]; <i>I</i>²=0%; low CoE), but 90-day mortality did not differ significantly between groups (4 studies; adjusted OR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.30-1.31]; <i>I</i>²=41.2%; very-low CoE). All subgroup analyses aligned with the main findings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results revealed that EVT was associated with improved functional outcomes without an increase in 90-day mortality, despite a higher symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage risk. Given the limited CoE and overall study quality, ongoing randomized trials are essential to confirm these findings and guide patient selection in the ultra-late time window.</p>","PeriodicalId":21989,"journal":{"name":"Stroke","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stroke","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.125.052121","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The benefit of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) beyond 24 hours from last known well in acute ischemic stroke remains uncertain. Although some slow progressors may retain salvageable tissue, supporting evidence in this ultra-late window comes mainly from small observational studies.

Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central up to February 2025 for studies comparing EVT and best medical therapy in patients with acute ischemic stroke treated >24 hours from last known well. Eligible studies reported functional independence (90-day 0-2 modified Rankin Scale score), excellent clinical outcome (90-day 0-1 modified Rankin Scale score), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, or 90-day mortality. Pooled unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated using random-effects meta-analyses. Subgroup analyses were performed by study design, stroke severity, imaging modality, and occlusion territory. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic and the Cochran Q test, and the certainty of evidence (CoE) was assessed using the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

Results: Ten observational studies (3 prospective and 7 retrospective) comprising 1871 patients (EVT: 866; best medical therapy: 1009) were included. EVT was associated with significantly higher odds of functional independence (8 studies; adjusted OR, 4.62 [95% CI, 3.30-6.47]; I²=0%; low CoE) and excellent clinical outcome (2 studies; adjusted OR, 5.68 [95% CI, 2.49-12.97]; I²=0%; very-low CoE). EVT increased the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (4 studies; adjusted OR, 9.54 [95% CI, 3.78-21.07]; I²=0%; low CoE), but 90-day mortality did not differ significantly between groups (4 studies; adjusted OR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.30-1.31]; I²=41.2%; very-low CoE). All subgroup analyses aligned with the main findings.

Conclusions: Our results revealed that EVT was associated with improved functional outcomes without an increase in 90-day mortality, despite a higher symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage risk. Given the limited CoE and overall study quality, ongoing randomized trials are essential to confirm these findings and guide patient selection in the ultra-late time window.

血管内血栓切除术与最佳药物治疗大于24小时的大血管闭塞性卒中:系统回顾和荟萃分析
背景:血管内取栓术(EVT)对急性缺血性卒中患者的益处仍不确定。尽管一些进展缓慢的患者可能保留可挽救的组织,但支持这一超晚期窗口期的证据主要来自小型观察性研究。方法:我们系统地检索PubMed、Embase、Scopus、Web of Science和Cochrane Central,检索截至2025年2月的研究,比较急性缺血性脑卒中患者在最后一次治疗后24小时内EVT和最佳药物治疗的研究。符合条件的研究报告功能独立性(90天0-2修改的Rankin量表评分),良好的临床结果(90天0-1修改的Rankin量表评分),症状性颅内出血,或90天死亡率。使用随机效应荟萃分析计算95% ci的合并未调整和调整的优势比(or)。根据研究设计、脑卒中严重程度、成像方式和闭塞区域进行亚组分析。采用I²统计量和Cochran Q检验评估统计异质性,采用推荐、评估、发展和评价分级法评估证据的确定性(CoE)。结果:纳入10项观察性研究(3项前瞻性研究,7项回顾性研究),包括1871例患者(EVT: 866例,最佳药物治疗:1009例)。EVT与功能独立性(8项研究;调整OR, 4.62 [95% CI, 3.30-6.47]; I²=0%;低CoE)和良好的临床结果(2项研究;调整OR, 5.68 [95% CI, 2.49-12.97]; I²=0%,极低CoE)相关。EVT增加了症状性颅内出血的风险(4项研究;校正OR为9.54 [95% CI, 3.78-21.07]; I²=0%;低CoE),但组间90天死亡率无显著差异(4项研究;校正OR为0.63 [95% CI, 0.30-1.31]; I²=41.2%;极低CoE)。所有的亚组分析都与主要研究结果一致。结论:我们的研究结果显示,EVT与功能结果的改善有关,但没有增加90天死亡率,尽管有更高的症状性颅内出血风险。鉴于有限的CoE和整体研究质量,正在进行的随机试验对于确认这些发现和指导超晚期患者选择至关重要。
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
Stroke
Stroke 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
13.40
自引率
6.00%
发文量
2021
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Stroke is a monthly publication that collates reports of clinical and basic investigation of any aspect of the cerebral circulation and its diseases. The publication covers a wide range of disciplines including anesthesiology, critical care medicine, epidemiology, internal medicine, neurology, neuro-ophthalmology, neuropathology, neuropsychology, neurosurgery, nuclear medicine, nursing, radiology, rehabilitation, speech pathology, vascular physiology, and vascular surgery. The audience of Stroke includes neurologists, basic scientists, cardiologists, vascular surgeons, internists, interventionalists, neurosurgeons, nurses, and physiatrists. Stroke is indexed in Biological Abstracts, BIOSIS, CAB Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents, Embase, MEDLINE, and Science Citation Index Expanded.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信