N Janjua1, A Alkawi, M F K Suri, A I Qureshi. 1. Department of Neurology, Long Island College Hospital and State University of New York Health Science Center at Brooklyn, Brooklyn, NY 11201, USA. NJanjua@chpnet.org
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Arterial reocclusion and distal embolization are known complications of ischemic stroke intervention, impacting treatment strategies and device design. We sought to determine their rates of occurrence and effects on long-term outcomes during endovascular treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of data from 4 prospective acute stroke protocols was performed. Patients underwent the standard technique for parent vessel angiography followed by pharmacologic thrombolysis and/or sonographic thrombolysis and/or mechanical thrombus disruption. Certain patients also received systemic heparin or abciximab therapy. Demographic, clinical, and angiographic variables were assessed at onset, 24 hours, 1 week, and 1-3 months after the event. "Distal embolization" was defined qualitatively as appearance of an occlusion on a downstream vessel. "Arterial reocclusion" was defined as subsequent reocclusion of the target vessel after initial recanalization had been achieved. RESULTS: Arterial reocclusion occurred in 18% of these patients, whereas distal embolization occurred in 16% of the 91 patients treated in these protocols. Arterial reocclusion, but not distal embolization, was associated with a lower likelihood of favorable outcome at 1-3 months (P = .05; odds ratio, 3.9; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.98) after adjusting for age, initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores, sex, time to treatment, initial angiographic grade, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and final recanalization. CONCLUSIONS: Arterial reocclusion and distal embolization occur in 16%-18% of patients with stroke undergoing endovascular intervention. Only arterial reocclusion is associated with poor long-term outcome. Prospective studies are needed to identify risk factors for their occurrence and possible preventive therapies.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Arterial reocclusion and distal embolization are known complications of ischemic stroke intervention, impacting treatment strategies and device design. We sought to determine their rates of occurrence and effects on long-term outcomes during endovascular treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of data from 4 prospective acute stroke protocols was performed. Patients underwent the standard technique for parent vessel angiography followed by pharmacologic thrombolysis and/or sonographic thrombolysis and/or mechanical thrombus disruption. Certain patients also received systemic heparin or abciximab therapy. Demographic, clinical, and angiographic variables were assessed at onset, 24 hours, 1 week, and 1-3 months after the event. "Distal embolization" was defined qualitatively as appearance of an occlusion on a downstream vessel. "Arterial reocclusion" was defined as subsequent reocclusion of the target vessel after initial recanalization had been achieved. RESULTS: Arterial reocclusion occurred in 18% of these patients, whereas distal embolization occurred in 16% of the 91 patients treated in these protocols. Arterial reocclusion, but not distal embolization, was associated with a lower likelihood of favorable outcome at 1-3 months (P = .05; odds ratio, 3.9; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-0.98) after adjusting for age, initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores, sex, time to treatment, initial angiographic grade, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and final recanalization. CONCLUSIONS: Arterial reocclusion and distal embolization occur in 16%-18% of patients with stroke undergoing endovascular intervention. Only arterial reocclusion is associated with poor long-term outcome. Prospective studies are needed to identify risk factors for their occurrence and possible preventive therapies.
Authors: R du Mesnil de Rochemont; S Schneider; B Yan; A Lehr; M Sitzer; J Berkefeld Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2006 Jun-Jul Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: B Reimers; N Corvaja; S Moshiri; S Saccà; R Albiero; C Di Mario; P Pascotto; A Colombo Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-07-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Patrick L Whitlow; Pedro Lylyk; Hugo Londero; Oscar A Mendiz; Klaus Mathias; Horst Jaeger; Juan Parodi; Claudio Schönholz; Jose Milei Journal: Stroke Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Adnan I Qureshi; Amir M Siddiqui; Stanley H Kim; Ricardo A Hanel; Andrew R Xavier; Jawad F Kirmani; M Fareed K Suri; Alan S Boulos; L Nelson Hopkins Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Adnan I Qureshi; Mustafa Saad; Osama O Zaidat; Jose I Suarez; Michael J Alexander; M Fareed; K Suri; Zulfiqar Ali; L Nelson Hopkins Journal: Stroke Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: D Sacks; B Baxter; B C V Campbell; J S Carpenter; C Cognard; D Dippel; M Eesa; U Fischer; K Hausegger; J A Hirsch; M S Hussain; O Jansen; M V Jayaraman; A A Khalessi; B W Kluck; S Lavine; P M Meyers; S Ramee; D A Rüfenacht; C M Schirmer; D Vorwerk Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2018-05-17 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: H M Hussein; A L Georgiadis; G Vazquez; J T Miley; M Z Memon; Y M Mohammad; G A Christoforidis; N Tariq; A I Qureshi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2010-01-14 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: T C Burns; G J Rodriguez; S Patel; H M Hussein; A L Georgiadis; K Lakshminarayan; A I Qureshi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2008-09-10 Impact factor: 3.825