Anterior Circulation Thrombectomy in Patients With Low National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale Score: Analysis of the National Inpatient Sample

IF 2.1 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Karan Patel, Kamil Taneja, Liqi Shu, Linda Zhang, Yunting Yu, M. Abdalkader, Matthew B. Obusan, S. Yaghi, Thanh N. Nguyen, N. Asdaghi, S. Oak, D. Tonetti, J. Siegler
{"title":"Anterior Circulation Thrombectomy in Patients With Low National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale Score: Analysis of the National Inpatient Sample","authors":"Karan Patel, Kamil Taneja, Liqi Shu, Linda Zhang, Yunting Yu, M. Abdalkader, Matthew B. Obusan, S. Yaghi, Thanh N. Nguyen, N. Asdaghi, S. Oak, D. Tonetti, J. Siegler","doi":"10.1161/svin.123.000998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Prior studies have shown benefit for endovascular therapy (EVT) in patients with large‐vessel occlusion and severe deficits, as captured by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. However the benefit of EVT in patients with National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score <6 is unclear.\n \n \n \n We queried the National Inpatient Sample (2018–2020) for patients with a large‐vessel occlusion of the internal carotid or middle cerebral artery with a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score <6, and compared outcomes between patients treated with EVT versus best medical management, using propensity score matching. The primary outcome was routine discharge (home or self‐care). Secondary outcomes were in‐hospital mortality, intracerebral hemorrhage, and length of stay. Primary and secondary outcomes were evaluated using multivariable regression adjusted for baseline characteristics, stroke severity, and treatment with thrombolysis.\n \n \n \n \n Of the 212 515 patients with an internal carotid artery/middle cerebral artery stroke, 49 115 met the inclusion criteria for our study. A total of 8035 patients were treated with EVT, and 41 080 were treated with best medical management. Patients treated with EVT had increased odds of routine discharge (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.78 [95% CI, 1.57–2.01];\n P\n <0.001), shorter length of hospital stays (adjusted β, −0.41 [95% CI, −0.63 to −0.19];\n P\n <0.001), and similar rates of death (adjusted OR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.39–1.24];\n P\n =0.22), compared with patients treated with best medical management. These relationships persisted in the propensity‐matched cohort.\n \n \n \n \n Patients treated with EVT compared with best medical management had greater odds of routine discharge, reduced length of stay, and no differences in intracerebral hemorrhage or early mortality. Our findings suggest potential real‐world benefit for EVT in patients with low National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores.\n","PeriodicalId":74875,"journal":{"name":"Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/svin.123.000998","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Prior studies have shown benefit for endovascular therapy (EVT) in patients with large‐vessel occlusion and severe deficits, as captured by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. However the benefit of EVT in patients with National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score <6 is unclear. We queried the National Inpatient Sample (2018–2020) for patients with a large‐vessel occlusion of the internal carotid or middle cerebral artery with a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score <6, and compared outcomes between patients treated with EVT versus best medical management, using propensity score matching. The primary outcome was routine discharge (home or self‐care). Secondary outcomes were in‐hospital mortality, intracerebral hemorrhage, and length of stay. Primary and secondary outcomes were evaluated using multivariable regression adjusted for baseline characteristics, stroke severity, and treatment with thrombolysis. Of the 212 515 patients with an internal carotid artery/middle cerebral artery stroke, 49 115 met the inclusion criteria for our study. A total of 8035 patients were treated with EVT, and 41 080 were treated with best medical management. Patients treated with EVT had increased odds of routine discharge (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.78 [95% CI, 1.57–2.01]; P <0.001), shorter length of hospital stays (adjusted β, −0.41 [95% CI, −0.63 to −0.19]; P <0.001), and similar rates of death (adjusted OR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.39–1.24]; P =0.22), compared with patients treated with best medical management. These relationships persisted in the propensity‐matched cohort. Patients treated with EVT compared with best medical management had greater odds of routine discharge, reduced length of stay, and no differences in intracerebral hemorrhage or early mortality. Our findings suggest potential real‐world benefit for EVT in patients with low National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores.
美国国立卫生研究院卒中评分低患者的前循环血栓切除术:对全国住院患者样本的分析
根据美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表,先前的研究表明血管内治疗(EVT)对大血管闭塞和严重缺陷患者有益。然而,EVT对美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表评分<6的患者的益处尚不清楚。我们查询了国家住院患者样本(2018-2020年)中内颈动脉或大脑中动脉大血管闭塞且美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表评分<6的患者,并使用倾向评分匹配比较了EVT治疗与最佳医疗管理患者的结果。主要结局为常规出院(在家或自我护理)。次要结局是住院死亡率、脑出血和住院时间。主要和次要结局采用多变量回归评估基线特征、卒中严重程度和溶栓治疗。在212 515例颈内动脉/大脑中动脉卒中患者中,49 115例符合我们研究的纳入标准。共8035例患者接受EVT治疗,41 080例患者接受最佳医疗管理。接受EVT治疗的患者常规出院的几率增加(校正优势比[OR], 1.78 [95% CI, 1.57-2.01];P <0.001),住院时间较短(调整后的β, - 0.41 [95% CI, - 0.63至- 0.19];P <0.001),相似的死亡率(校正OR为0.70 [95% CI, 0.39-1.24];P =0.22),与最佳医疗管理的患者相比。这些关系在倾向匹配的队列中持续存在。与最佳医疗管理相比,接受EVT治疗的患者常规出院的几率更高,住院时间缩短,脑出血或早期死亡率没有差异。我们的研究结果表明,EVT在美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表评分较低的患者中具有潜在的现实益处。
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