摘要编号:LBA1血管内血栓切除术与非对比CT选择的晚期缺血性卒中最佳药物治疗

IF 2.1 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
P. Dhillon, Waleed Z. Butt, T. Jovin, A. Podlasek, N. McConachie, R. Lenthall, S. Nair, Luqman Malik, K. Krishnan, Iacopo Chiavacci, F. Mehedi, Timothy Hong, Harriwin Selva, R. Dineen, T. England
{"title":"摘要编号:LBA1血管内血栓切除术与非对比CT选择的晚期缺血性卒中最佳药物治疗","authors":"P. Dhillon, Waleed Z. Butt, T. Jovin, A. Podlasek, N. McConachie, R. Lenthall, S. Nair, Luqman Malik, K. Krishnan, Iacopo Chiavacci, F. Mehedi, Timothy Hong, Harriwin Selva, R. Dineen, T. England","doi":"10.1161/svin.03.suppl_1.lba1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n The efficacy and safety of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) beyond 6 hours from acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) onset for patients with proximal large vessel occlusion (LVO) selected without CT perfusion or MR imaging is undetermined in routine clinical practice.\n \n \n \n In this single centre study, we identified consecutive AIS patients with an ICA or M1 MCA segment occlusion who were eligible for EVT based on non‐contrast CT/CT angiography (without CT perfusion or MR imaging) using an Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) of ≥ 6, and an NIHSS score of≥ 6, presenting beyond 6 hours from stroke onset, between January 2018 and March 2022. During the study period, EVT capacity limitations meant EVT‐eligible patients presenting out of regular working hours (between 18.00 and 08.00 on weekdays) or on weekends, consistently received best medical management (BMM). This systemic unavailability of EVT, allows a comparison of EVT and BMM in patients who meet the same inclusion criteria, in which selection based on physician‐related bias is significantly reduced. Functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days), symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH) and mortality at 90 days were compared between patients receiving EVT or BMM following multivariable adjustment for age, sex, baseline stroke severity, ASPECTS, onset‐to‐neuroimaging time, IV thrombolysis, and clot location.Pre‐specified subgroup analyses were performed.\n \n \n \n Among 4802 AIS patients, 150 patients (3.1%) presenting beyond 6‐hours of onset were eligible for EVT: 74 (49%) treated with EVT and 76 (51%) with BMM. Compared to the BMM group, patients treated with EVT had significantly improved functional outcome (mRS) (adjusted common OR = 2.23, 95%CI 1.18‐4.22, p = 0.013), and higher rates of functional independence (mRS≤2; 39.2.% vs 9.2%; aOR = 4.73, 95%CI 1.64‐13.63, p = 0.004). No significant difference was observed between the EVT and BMM groups in the sICH (5.4% vs 2.6%, p = 0.94) or mortality (20.2% vs 47.3%, p = 0.16) rates, respectively. EVT remained effective within the 6–12 hour and >12 hour time window subgroups. No significant treatment interaction was observed in all subgroups.\n \n \n \n In routine clinical practice, of the 3.1% of patients in our AIS population presenting after 6 hours from stroke onset who were deemed eligible for EVT by NCCT/CTA alone, those treated with EVT achieved significantly improved functional outcome, compared to patients treated with BMM only. No significant differences were noted between the two groups with respect to sICH and mortality. While confirmatory randomised trials are awaited, these findings suggest that EVT is effective and safe when performed in AIS patients selected without CTP or MRI beyond 6 hours from stroke onset.\n","PeriodicalId":74875,"journal":{"name":"Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Abstract Number: LBA1 Endovascular Thrombectomy vs Best Medical Therapy for Late Presentation Ischaemic Stroke Selected using Non‐Contrast CT\",\"authors\":\"P. Dhillon, Waleed Z. Butt, T. Jovin, A. Podlasek, N. McConachie, R. Lenthall, S. Nair, Luqman Malik, K. Krishnan, Iacopo Chiavacci, F. Mehedi, Timothy Hong, Harriwin Selva, R. Dineen, T. England\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/svin.03.suppl_1.lba1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n The efficacy and safety of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) beyond 6 hours from acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) onset for patients with proximal large vessel occlusion (LVO) selected without CT perfusion or MR imaging is undetermined in routine clinical practice.\\n \\n \\n \\n In this single centre study, we identified consecutive AIS patients with an ICA or M1 MCA segment occlusion who were eligible for EVT based on non‐contrast CT/CT angiography (without CT perfusion or MR imaging) using an Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) of ≥ 6, and an NIHSS score of≥ 6, presenting beyond 6 hours from stroke onset, between January 2018 and March 2022. During the study period, EVT capacity limitations meant EVT‐eligible patients presenting out of regular working hours (between 18.00 and 08.00 on weekdays) or on weekends, consistently received best medical management (BMM). This systemic unavailability of EVT, allows a comparison of EVT and BMM in patients who meet the same inclusion criteria, in which selection based on physician‐related bias is significantly reduced. Functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days), symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH) and mortality at 90 days were compared between patients receiving EVT or BMM following multivariable adjustment for age, sex, baseline stroke severity, ASPECTS, onset‐to‐neuroimaging time, IV thrombolysis, and clot location.Pre‐specified subgroup analyses were performed.\\n \\n \\n \\n Among 4802 AIS patients, 150 patients (3.1%) presenting beyond 6‐hours of onset were eligible for EVT: 74 (49%) treated with EVT and 76 (51%) with BMM. Compared to the BMM group, patients treated with EVT had significantly improved functional outcome (mRS) (adjusted common OR = 2.23, 95%CI 1.18‐4.22, p = 0.013), and higher rates of functional independence (mRS≤2; 39.2.% vs 9.2%; aOR = 4.73, 95%CI 1.64‐13.63, p = 0.004). No significant difference was observed between the EVT and BMM groups in the sICH (5.4% vs 2.6%, p = 0.94) or mortality (20.2% vs 47.3%, p = 0.16) rates, respectively. EVT remained effective within the 6–12 hour and >12 hour time window subgroups. No significant treatment interaction was observed in all subgroups.\\n \\n \\n \\n In routine clinical practice, of the 3.1% of patients in our AIS population presenting after 6 hours from stroke onset who were deemed eligible for EVT by NCCT/CTA alone, those treated with EVT achieved significantly improved functional outcome, compared to patients treated with BMM only. No significant differences were noted between the two groups with respect to sICH and mortality. While confirmatory randomised trials are awaited, these findings suggest that EVT is effective and safe when performed in AIS patients selected without CTP or MRI beyond 6 hours from stroke onset.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":74875,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"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.03.suppl_1.lba1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/svin.03.suppl_1.lba1","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

摘要

在常规临床实践中,对于没有CT灌注或MR成像的近端大血管闭塞(LVO)患者,在急性缺血性卒中(AIS)发病后6小时内血管内取栓(EVT)的有效性和安全性尚不确定。在这项单中心研究中,我们确定了具有ICA或M1 MCA段闭塞的连续AIS患者,这些患者符合EVT的条件,基于非对比CT/CT血管造影(无CT灌注或MR成像),使用阿尔伯塔卒中计划早期CT评分(ASPECTS)≥6,NIHSS评分≥6,在2018年1月至2022年3月期间卒中发作超过6小时。在研究期间,EVT容量限制意味着EVT符合条件的患者在正常工作时间(工作日18:00至08:00之间)或周末就诊,始终接受最佳医疗管理(BMM)。由于EVT的全体性缺失,可以对符合相同纳入标准的患者进行EVT和BMM的比较,其中基于医生相关偏倚的选择显着减少。在年龄、性别、基线卒中严重程度、各方面因素、发病至神经成像时间、静脉溶栓和血栓位置等多变量调整后,比较EVT或BMM患者90天的功能结局(改良Rankin量表(mRS))、症状性颅内出血(sICH)和死亡率。进行预先指定的亚组分析。在4802名AIS患者中,150名发病时间超过6小时的患者(3.1%)符合EVT治疗条件:74名(49%)接受EVT治疗,76名(51%)接受BMM治疗。与BMM组相比,EVT治疗的患者功能预后(mRS)显著改善(调整后常见OR = 2.23, 95%CI 1.18‐4.22,p = 0.013),功能独立性率更高(mRS≤2;39.2.% vs 9.2%;aOR = 4.73, 95%CI 1.64‐13.63,p = 0.004)。EVT组和BMM组在siich发生率(5.4% vs 2.6%, p = 0.94)和死亡率(20.2% vs 47.3%, p = 0.16)方面均无显著差异。EVT在6-12小时和10 - 12小时时间窗口亚组内仍然有效。在所有亚组中均未观察到显著的治疗相互作用。在常规临床实践中,在卒中发作6小时后出现的3.1%的AIS患者中,仅通过NCCT/CTA被认为符合EVT治疗条件,与仅接受BMM治疗的患者相比,接受EVT治疗的患者功能预后显著改善。在sICH和死亡率方面,两组之间没有显著差异。虽然还有待验证性随机试验,但这些研究结果表明,在卒中发作后6小时内选择无CTP或MRI的AIS患者进行EVT是有效和安全的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Abstract Number: LBA1 Endovascular Thrombectomy vs Best Medical Therapy for Late Presentation Ischaemic Stroke Selected using Non‐Contrast CT
The efficacy and safety of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) beyond 6 hours from acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) onset for patients with proximal large vessel occlusion (LVO) selected without CT perfusion or MR imaging is undetermined in routine clinical practice. In this single centre study, we identified consecutive AIS patients with an ICA or M1 MCA segment occlusion who were eligible for EVT based on non‐contrast CT/CT angiography (without CT perfusion or MR imaging) using an Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) of ≥ 6, and an NIHSS score of≥ 6, presenting beyond 6 hours from stroke onset, between January 2018 and March 2022. During the study period, EVT capacity limitations meant EVT‐eligible patients presenting out of regular working hours (between 18.00 and 08.00 on weekdays) or on weekends, consistently received best medical management (BMM). This systemic unavailability of EVT, allows a comparison of EVT and BMM in patients who meet the same inclusion criteria, in which selection based on physician‐related bias is significantly reduced. Functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days), symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH) and mortality at 90 days were compared between patients receiving EVT or BMM following multivariable adjustment for age, sex, baseline stroke severity, ASPECTS, onset‐to‐neuroimaging time, IV thrombolysis, and clot location.Pre‐specified subgroup analyses were performed. Among 4802 AIS patients, 150 patients (3.1%) presenting beyond 6‐hours of onset were eligible for EVT: 74 (49%) treated with EVT and 76 (51%) with BMM. Compared to the BMM group, patients treated with EVT had significantly improved functional outcome (mRS) (adjusted common OR = 2.23, 95%CI 1.18‐4.22, p = 0.013), and higher rates of functional independence (mRS≤2; 39.2.% vs 9.2%; aOR = 4.73, 95%CI 1.64‐13.63, p = 0.004). No significant difference was observed between the EVT and BMM groups in the sICH (5.4% vs 2.6%, p = 0.94) or mortality (20.2% vs 47.3%, p = 0.16) rates, respectively. EVT remained effective within the 6–12 hour and >12 hour time window subgroups. No significant treatment interaction was observed in all subgroups. In routine clinical practice, of the 3.1% of patients in our AIS population presenting after 6 hours from stroke onset who were deemed eligible for EVT by NCCT/CTA alone, those treated with EVT achieved significantly improved functional outcome, compared to patients treated with BMM only. No significant differences were noted between the two groups with respect to sICH and mortality. While confirmatory randomised trials are awaited, these findings suggest that EVT is effective and safe when performed in AIS patients selected without CTP or MRI beyond 6 hours from stroke onset.
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