Antithrombotic treatment and outcome after endovascular treatment and acute carotid artery stenting in stroke patients with atrial fibrillation.

Johannes M Weller, Franziska Dorn, Julius N Meissner, Sebastian Stösser, Niklas M Beckonert, Julia Nordsiek, Christine Kindler, Christoph Riegler, Fee Keil, Gabor C Petzold, Felix J Bode
{"title":"Antithrombotic treatment and outcome after endovascular treatment and acute carotid artery stenting in stroke patients with atrial fibrillation.","authors":"Johannes M Weller, Franziska Dorn, Julius N Meissner, Sebastian Stösser, Niklas M Beckonert, Julia Nordsiek, Christine Kindler, Christoph Riegler, Fee Keil, Gabor C Petzold, Felix J Bode","doi":"10.1186/s42466-022-00207-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is the mainstay of secondary prevention in ischemic stroke patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, in AF patients with large vessel occlusion stroke treated by endovascular therapy (ET) and acute carotid artery stenting (CAS), the optimal antithrombotic medication remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a subgroup analysis of the German Stroke Registry-Endovascular Treatment (GSR-ET), a prospective multicenter cohort of patients with large vessel occlusion stroke undergoing ET. Patients with AF and CAS during ET were included. We analyzed baseline and periprocedural characteristics, antithrombotic strategies and functional outcome at 90 days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 6635 patients in the registry, a total of 82 patients (1.2%, age 77.9 ± 8.0 years, 39% female) with AF and extracranial CAS during ET were included. Antithrombotic medication at admission, during ET, postprocedural and at discharge was highly variable and overall mortality in hospital (21%) and at 90 days (39%) was high. Among discharged patients (n = 65), most frequent antithrombotic regimes were dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT, 37%), single APT + OAC (25%) and DAPT + OAC (20%). Comparing DAPT to single or dual APT + OAC, clinical characteristics at discharge were similar (median NIHSS 7.5 [interquartile range, 3-10.5] vs 7 [4-11], p = 0.73, mRS 4 [IQR 3-4] vs. 4 [IQR 3-5], p = 0.79), but 90-day mortality was higher without OAC (32 vs 4%, p = 0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In AF patients who underwent ET and CAS, 90-day mortality was higher in patients not receiving OAC.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>https://www.</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrials: </strong>gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03356392.</p>","PeriodicalId":19169,"journal":{"name":"Neurological Research and Practice","volume":" ","pages":"42"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9465921/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurological Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-022-00207-7","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: Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is the mainstay of secondary prevention in ischemic stroke patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, in AF patients with large vessel occlusion stroke treated by endovascular therapy (ET) and acute carotid artery stenting (CAS), the optimal antithrombotic medication remains unclear.

Methods: This is a subgroup analysis of the German Stroke Registry-Endovascular Treatment (GSR-ET), a prospective multicenter cohort of patients with large vessel occlusion stroke undergoing ET. Patients with AF and CAS during ET were included. We analyzed baseline and periprocedural characteristics, antithrombotic strategies and functional outcome at 90 days.

Results: Among 6635 patients in the registry, a total of 82 patients (1.2%, age 77.9 ± 8.0 years, 39% female) with AF and extracranial CAS during ET were included. Antithrombotic medication at admission, during ET, postprocedural and at discharge was highly variable and overall mortality in hospital (21%) and at 90 days (39%) was high. Among discharged patients (n = 65), most frequent antithrombotic regimes were dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT, 37%), single APT + OAC (25%) and DAPT + OAC (20%). Comparing DAPT to single or dual APT + OAC, clinical characteristics at discharge were similar (median NIHSS 7.5 [interquartile range, 3-10.5] vs 7 [4-11], p = 0.73, mRS 4 [IQR 3-4] vs. 4 [IQR 3-5], p = 0.79), but 90-day mortality was higher without OAC (32 vs 4%, p = 0.02).

Conclusions: In AF patients who underwent ET and CAS, 90-day mortality was higher in patients not receiving OAC.

Registration: https://www.

Clinicaltrials: gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03356392.

Abstract Image

心房颤动脑卒中患者血管内治疗和急性颈动脉支架植入术后的抗血栓治疗和预后。
背景:口服抗凝药(OAC)是心房颤动(AF)缺血性卒中患者二级预防的主要药物。然而,在接受血管内治疗(ET)和急性颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)治疗的大血管闭塞性卒中房颤患者中,最佳抗血栓药物仍不明确:这是德国卒中登记-血管内治疗(GSR-ET)的一项亚组分析,GSR-ET是对接受血管内治疗的大血管闭塞性卒中患者进行的一项前瞻性多中心队列研究。ET期间有房颤和CAS的患者也被纳入其中。我们分析了基线和围手术期特征、抗血栓策略以及 90 天后的功能预后:在登记的 6635 名患者中,共有 82 名房颤患者(1.2%,年龄 77.9 ± 8.0 岁,39% 为女性)在 ET 期间接受了颅外 CAS。入院时、ET期间、术后和出院时的抗血栓药物治疗情况差异很大,住院期间(21%)和90天后(39%)的总死亡率很高。在出院患者(n = 65)中,最常见的抗血栓治疗方案是双重抗血小板疗法(DAPT,37%)、单一 APT + OAC(25%)和 DAPT + OAC(20%)。将 DAPT 与单一或双重 APT + OAC 相比,出院时的临床特征相似(NIHSS 中位数 7.5 [四分位间范围,3-10.5] vs 7 [4-11],p = 0.73,mRS 4 [IQR 3-4] vs. 4 [IQR 3-5],p = 0.79),但不使用 OAC 的 90 天死亡率更高(32 vs 4%,p = 0.02):结论:在接受 ET 和 CAS 的房颤患者中,未接受 OAC 的患者 90 天死亡率更高。注册:https://www.Clinicaltrials: gov ; 唯一标识符:NCT03356392:NCT03356392.
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