颅内动脉粥样硬化相关大血管闭塞症的诊治模式:救援-LVO调查

F. Siddiqui, Jeffrey J. Fletcher, A. Elias, S. Dandapat, Sushant P. Kale, Daniel M. Heiferman, Loren Riedy, M. Farooqui, A. Rodriguez-Calienes, J. Vivanco-Suarez, Aditya Pandey, S. Ortega‐Gutierrez
{"title":"颅内动脉粥样硬化相关大血管闭塞症的诊治模式:救援-LVO调查","authors":"F. Siddiqui, Jeffrey J. Fletcher, A. Elias, S. Dandapat, Sushant P. Kale, Daniel M. Heiferman, Loren Riedy, M. Farooqui, A. Rodriguez-Calienes, J. Vivanco-Suarez, Aditya Pandey, S. Ortega‐Gutierrez","doi":"10.1161/svin.123.001133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n We aimed to determine the current practice patterns among neurointerventional practitioners frequently involved in treating intracranial atherosclerosis‐related large‐vessel occlusion (ICAS‐LVO) during mechanical thrombectomy.\n \n \n \n We conducted an international online survey of neurointerventionalist members of the Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology and Society of Neurointerventional Surgery. The 28‐question poll evaluated the preferences on diagnosis, treatment, and endovascular approach to ICAS‐LVO.\n \n \n \n A total of 184 individual survey responses were obtained from practicing neurointerventional physicians. Overall, 38.3% reported an incidence of 6% to 10% of ICAS‐LVO during mechanical thrombectomy. Most neurointerventionalists (91%) diagnose ICAS‐LVO after a continued or recurrent occlusion or by the presence of fixed focal stenosis after multiple mechanical thrombectomy attempts. Most respondents (86%) preferred acute treatment of ICAS‐LVO with rescue stenting (RS)±angioplasty. However, in patients who achieved recanalization with a severe fixed focal stenosis, most (58%) recommended primary medical management. The preferred medication during acute RS was intravenous antiplatelet therapy (65%), and after acute RS, it was dual oral antiplatelet therapy (65%). Fear of hemorrhagic complications (74%) was the most compelling reason not to perform RS±angioplasty. Of respondents, 24% were hesitant to randomize patients to acute RS versus medical therapy in a future randomized trial because of the lack of sensitive and specific biomarkers to diagnose ICAS‐LVO before mechanical thrombectomy treatment.\n \n \n \n The findings of this survey highlight the variations in practice in the medical and endovascular management of ICAS‐LVO. In addition, it informs the situation of equipoise in the treatment decision in ICAS‐LVO, which can then be incorporated into the design of future randomized clinical trials.\n","PeriodicalId":21977,"journal":{"name":"Stroke: Vascular and Interventional Neurology","volume":"56 24","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patterns of Care in the Diagnosis and Management of Intracranial Atherosclerosis‐Related Large‐Vessel Occlusion: The Rescue‐LVO Survey\",\"authors\":\"F. Siddiqui, Jeffrey J. Fletcher, A. Elias, S. Dandapat, Sushant P. Kale, Daniel M. Heiferman, Loren Riedy, M. Farooqui, A. Rodriguez-Calienes, J. Vivanco-Suarez, Aditya Pandey, S. Ortega‐Gutierrez\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/svin.123.001133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n We aimed to determine the current practice patterns among neurointerventional practitioners frequently involved in treating intracranial atherosclerosis‐related large‐vessel occlusion (ICAS‐LVO) during mechanical thrombectomy.\\n \\n \\n \\n We conducted an international online survey of neurointerventionalist members of the Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology and Society of Neurointerventional Surgery. The 28‐question poll evaluated the preferences on diagnosis, treatment, and endovascular approach to ICAS‐LVO.\\n \\n \\n \\n A total of 184 individual survey responses were obtained from practicing neurointerventional physicians. Overall, 38.3% reported an incidence of 6% to 10% of ICAS‐LVO during mechanical thrombectomy. Most neurointerventionalists (91%) diagnose ICAS‐LVO after a continued or recurrent occlusion or by the presence of fixed focal stenosis after multiple mechanical thrombectomy attempts. Most respondents (86%) preferred acute treatment of ICAS‐LVO with rescue stenting (RS)±angioplasty. However, in patients who achieved recanalization with a severe fixed focal stenosis, most (58%) recommended primary medical management. The preferred medication during acute RS was intravenous antiplatelet therapy (65%), and after acute RS, it was dual oral antiplatelet therapy (65%). Fear of hemorrhagic complications (74%) was the most compelling reason not to perform RS±angioplasty. Of respondents, 24% were hesitant to randomize patients to acute RS versus medical therapy in a future randomized trial because of the lack of sensitive and specific biomarkers to diagnose ICAS‐LVO before mechanical thrombectomy treatment.\\n \\n \\n \\n The findings of this survey highlight the variations in practice in the medical and endovascular management of ICAS‐LVO. In addition, it informs the situation of equipoise in the treatment decision in ICAS‐LVO, which can then be incorporated into the design of future randomized clinical trials.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":21977,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Stroke: Vascular and Interventional Neurology\",\"volume\":\"56 24\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Stroke: Vascular and Interventional Neurology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/svin.123.001133\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stroke: Vascular and Interventional Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/svin.123.001133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们的目的是确定在机械取栓术中经常参与治疗颅内动脉粥样硬化相关大血管闭塞(ICAS-LVO)的神经介入医师目前的实践模式。 我们对血管与介入神经病学学会和神经介入手术学会的神经介入医师会员进行了一次国际在线调查。这项包含 28 个问题的调查评估了对 ICAS-LVO 的诊断、治疗和血管内方法的偏好。 共有 184 名神经介入执业医师对调查进行了回复。总体而言,38.3%的医生表示在机械血栓切除术中ICAS-LVO的发生率为6%至10%。大多数神经介入医生(91%)在出现持续或复发性闭塞或多次尝试机械血栓切除术后出现固定病灶狭窄时诊断为 ICAS-LVO。大多数受访者(86%)倾向于采用救援支架植入术(RS)±血管成形术对 ICAS-LVO 进行急性治疗。然而,对于已实现再通且有严重固定病灶狭窄的患者,大多数受访者(58%)建议采用初级药物治疗。急性 RS 期间的首选药物是静脉注射抗血小板疗法(65%),急性 RS 后的首选药物是双重口服抗血小板疗法(65%)。害怕出血并发症(74%)是不进行 RS±血管成形术的最有力的理由。在受访者中,有 24% 的人犹豫是否在未来的随机试验中将患者随机分为急性 RS 和药物治疗两种,因为在机械血栓切除术治疗前缺乏敏感和特异的生物标志物来诊断 ICAS-LVO。 这项调查的结果凸显了ICAS-LVO的内科和血管内治疗实践中存在的差异。此外,它还揭示了ICAS-LVO治疗决策中的等效情况,可将其纳入未来随机临床试验的设计中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Patterns of Care in the Diagnosis and Management of Intracranial Atherosclerosis‐Related Large‐Vessel Occlusion: The Rescue‐LVO Survey
We aimed to determine the current practice patterns among neurointerventional practitioners frequently involved in treating intracranial atherosclerosis‐related large‐vessel occlusion (ICAS‐LVO) during mechanical thrombectomy. We conducted an international online survey of neurointerventionalist members of the Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology and Society of Neurointerventional Surgery. The 28‐question poll evaluated the preferences on diagnosis, treatment, and endovascular approach to ICAS‐LVO. A total of 184 individual survey responses were obtained from practicing neurointerventional physicians. Overall, 38.3% reported an incidence of 6% to 10% of ICAS‐LVO during mechanical thrombectomy. Most neurointerventionalists (91%) diagnose ICAS‐LVO after a continued or recurrent occlusion or by the presence of fixed focal stenosis after multiple mechanical thrombectomy attempts. Most respondents (86%) preferred acute treatment of ICAS‐LVO with rescue stenting (RS)±angioplasty. However, in patients who achieved recanalization with a severe fixed focal stenosis, most (58%) recommended primary medical management. The preferred medication during acute RS was intravenous antiplatelet therapy (65%), and after acute RS, it was dual oral antiplatelet therapy (65%). Fear of hemorrhagic complications (74%) was the most compelling reason not to perform RS±angioplasty. Of respondents, 24% were hesitant to randomize patients to acute RS versus medical therapy in a future randomized trial because of the lack of sensitive and specific biomarkers to diagnose ICAS‐LVO before mechanical thrombectomy treatment. The findings of this survey highlight the variations in practice in the medical and endovascular management of ICAS‐LVO. In addition, it informs the situation of equipoise in the treatment decision in ICAS‐LVO, which can then be incorporated into the design of future randomized clinical trials.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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