Clinical outcomes following reperfusion therapy in acute ischemic stroke patients with infective endocarditis: a systematic review

IF 2.6 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Rohan Maheshwari, D. Cordato, D. Wardman, P. Thomas, S. Bhaskar
{"title":"Clinical outcomes following reperfusion therapy in acute ischemic stroke patients with infective endocarditis: a systematic review","authors":"Rohan Maheshwari, D. Cordato, D. Wardman, P. Thomas, S. Bhaskar","doi":"10.1177/11795735221081597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is a common and fatal complication of infective endocarditis (IE); however, there is a lack of understanding regarding treatment efficacy. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in IE patients experiencing AIS. Objectives The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review investigating the outcomes of AIS in IE patients receiving IVT and/or EVT as a treatment method and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of these methods of reperfusion therapy. Design A systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted. Data Sources and Methods The EMBASE, Cochrane, and PubMed databases were searched for literature published between 2005 and 2021 investigating outcomes of reperfusion therapy post-AIS in IE and non-IE patients. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the overall frequency of clinical outcomes, and groupwise comparisons were performed using Fisher’s exact test to assess the significance of groupwise differences. Results Three studies were finally included in the systematic review. A total of 13.5% of IE patients compared to 37% of non-IE patients achieved a good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score≤ 2) (P < .001). Furthermore, a larger percentage of the IE cohort achieved good functional outcomes after EVT (22.0%) compared to IVT (10.4%) (P = .013). The IE cohort also had a higher 3-month postreperfusion mortality rate (48.8%) compared to the non-IE cohort (24.9%) (P < .001). The rate of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) postreperfusion was also significantly higher in the IE cohort (23.5%) than in the non-IE cohort (6.5%) (P < .001). Conclusion AIS patients with IE, treated with IVT, EVT, or a combination of the two, experience worse clinical and safety outcomes than non-IE patients. EVT yielded better functional outcomes, albeit with higher postreperfusion ICH rates, than IVT.","PeriodicalId":15218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Central Nervous System Disease","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Central Nervous System Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11795735221081597","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is a common and fatal complication of infective endocarditis (IE); however, there is a lack of understanding regarding treatment efficacy. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in IE patients experiencing AIS. Objectives The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review investigating the outcomes of AIS in IE patients receiving IVT and/or EVT as a treatment method and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of these methods of reperfusion therapy. Design A systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted. Data Sources and Methods The EMBASE, Cochrane, and PubMed databases were searched for literature published between 2005 and 2021 investigating outcomes of reperfusion therapy post-AIS in IE and non-IE patients. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the overall frequency of clinical outcomes, and groupwise comparisons were performed using Fisher’s exact test to assess the significance of groupwise differences. Results Three studies were finally included in the systematic review. A total of 13.5% of IE patients compared to 37% of non-IE patients achieved a good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score≤ 2) (P < .001). Furthermore, a larger percentage of the IE cohort achieved good functional outcomes after EVT (22.0%) compared to IVT (10.4%) (P = .013). The IE cohort also had a higher 3-month postreperfusion mortality rate (48.8%) compared to the non-IE cohort (24.9%) (P < .001). The rate of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) postreperfusion was also significantly higher in the IE cohort (23.5%) than in the non-IE cohort (6.5%) (P < .001). Conclusion AIS patients with IE, treated with IVT, EVT, or a combination of the two, experience worse clinical and safety outcomes than non-IE patients. EVT yielded better functional outcomes, albeit with higher postreperfusion ICH rates, than IVT.
急性缺血性脑卒中并发感染性心内膜炎患者再灌注治疗后的临床结果:一项系统综述
背景急性缺血性脑卒中(AIS)是感染性心内膜炎(IE)常见的致命并发症;然而,人们对治疗效果缺乏了解。本系统综述旨在评估静脉溶栓(IVT)和血管内血栓切除术(EVT)治疗AIS IE患者的安全性和有效性。目的本研究的目的是对接受IVT和/或EVT作为治疗方法的IE患者的AIS结果进行系统综述,并评估这些再灌注治疗方法的安全性和有效性。设计根据系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南进行系统评价。数据来源和方法检索EMBASE、Cochrane和PubMed数据库中2005年至2021年间发表的研究IE和非IE患者AIS后再灌注治疗结果的文献。描述性统计用于描述临床结果的总体频率,并使用Fisher精确检验进行分组比较,以评估分组差异的显著性。结果三项研究最终纳入系统综述。与37%的非IE患者相比,共有13.5%的IE患者获得了良好的功能结果(改良Rankin量表评分≤2)(P<.001)。此外,与IVT(10.4%)相比,EVT(22.0%)后获得良好功能结果的IE队列比例更大(P=0.013)。与非IE队列(24.9%)相比,IE队列的再灌注后3个月死亡率(48.8%)也更高(P<.001)。再灌注后颅内出血(ICH)的发生率IE队列(23.5%)也显著高于非IE队列的(6.5%)结论接受IVT、EVT或两者联合治疗的AIS IE患者的临床和安全性结果比非IE患者差。EVT比IVT产生更好的功能结果,尽管再灌注后ICH发生率更高。
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
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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