BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: the Penumbra Pivotal Stroke Trial reported a 25% good outcome (modified Rankin scale score ≤ 2) despite an 81% recanalization rate. We evaluated the association of a favorable initial noncontrast CT and a short time to recanalization in predicting good outcome. METHODS: data were from the Penumbra Pivotal Stroke Trial. Baseline scans were evaluated by 2 experienced readers blinded to outcomes using ASPECTS. ASPECTS scores were dichotomized into >7 and ≤ 7 for primary analysis. Data on degree of recanalization based on thrombolysis in myocardial infarction scores, stroke onset to recanalization, and CT to recanalization times were obtained. Primary outcome was modified Rankin scale score ≤ 2 at 3 months. RESULTS: median baseline NIHSS was 18 (range, 8-34) and median baseline ASPECTS score was 6 (range, 0-10); 81.2% achieved recanalization (thrombolysis in myocardial infarction, 2-3) and (27.7%) achieved good outcome. Good outcome was significantly higher in the ASPECTS score >7 group when compared to the ASPECTS score ≤ 7 group (50% vs 15%; RR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.6-6.8; P=0.0001). No patient with an ASPECTS score ≤ 4 (n=28) or without recanalization (n=16) had a good outcome. There was an interaction between baseline ASPECTS score (>7 and ≤ 7) and onset to recanalization time (≤ 300 minutes and >300 minutes) in predicting good outcome (P=0.06). CONCLUSIONS: patients with baseline CT ASPECTS score ≤ 4 do not benefit from recanalization. Fast recanalization may benefit patients with evident damage on the CT scan (ASPECTS score >4). Overall, patients benefit the most with early recanalization and a favorable baseline CT scan (ASPECTS score >7).
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: the Penumbra Pivotal Stroke Trial reported a 25% good outcome (modified Rankin scale score ≤ 2) despite an 81% recanalization rate. We evaluated the association of a favorable initial noncontrast CT and a short time to recanalization in predicting good outcome. METHODS: data were from the Penumbra Pivotal Stroke Trial. Baseline scans were evaluated by 2 experienced readers blinded to outcomes using ASPECTS. ASPECTS scores were dichotomized into >7 and ≤ 7 for primary analysis. Data on degree of recanalization based on thrombolysis in myocardial infarction scores, stroke onset to recanalization, and CT to recanalization times were obtained. Primary outcome was modified Rankin scale score ≤ 2 at 3 months. RESULTS: median baseline NIHSS was 18 (range, 8-34) and median baseline ASPECTS score was 6 (range, 0-10); 81.2% achieved recanalization (thrombolysis in myocardial infarction, 2-3) and (27.7%) achieved good outcome. Good outcome was significantly higher in the ASPECTS score >7 group when compared to the ASPECTS score ≤ 7 group (50% vs 15%; RR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.6-6.8; P=0.0001). No patient with an ASPECTS score ≤ 4 (n=28) or without recanalization (n=16) had a good outcome. There was an interaction between baseline ASPECTS score (>7 and ≤ 7) and onset to recanalization time (≤ 300 minutes and >300 minutes) in predicting good outcome (P=0.06). CONCLUSIONS:patients with baseline CT ASPECTS score ≤ 4 do not benefit from recanalization. Fast recanalization may benefit patients with evident damage on the CT scan (ASPECTS score >4). Overall, patients benefit the most with early recanalization and a favorable baseline CT scan (ASPECTS score >7).
Authors: Maarten G Lansberg; Matus Straka; Stephanie Kemp; Michael Mlynash; Lawrence R Wechsler; Tudor G Jovin; Michael J Wilder; Helmi L Lutsep; Todd J Czartoski; Richard A Bernstein; Cherylee W J Chang; Steven Warach; Franz Fazekas; Manabu Inoue; Aaryani Tipirneni; Scott A Hamilton; Greg Zaharchuk; Michael P Marks; Roland Bammer; Gregory W Albers Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2012-09-04 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Jens Fiehler; Michael Söderman; Francis Turjman; Philip M White; Søren Jacob Bakke; Salvatore Mangiafico; Rüdiger von Kummer; Mario Muto; Christophe Cognard; Jan Gralla Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Jens Fiehler; Michael Söderman; Francis Turjman; Philip M White; Søren Jacob Bakke; Salvatore Mangiafico; Rüdiger von Kummer; Mario Muto; Christophe Cognard; Jan Gralla Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: David S Liebeskind; Reza Jahan; Raul G Nogueira; Tudor G Jovin; Helmi L Lutsep; Jeffrey L Saver Journal: Stroke Date: 2014-02-13 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Mayank Goyal; Mohammed A Almekhlafi; Liqiong Fan; Bijoy K Menon; Andrew M Demchuk; Sharon D Yeatts; Michael D Hill; Thomas Tomsick; Pooja Khatri; Osama O Zaidat; Edward C Jauch; Muneer Eesa; Tudor G Jovin; Joseph P Broderick Journal: Circulation Date: 2014-05-09 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jelle Demeestere; Lauranne Scheldeman; Sandra A Cornelissen; Sam Heye; Anke Wouters; Patrick Dupont; Sören Christensen; Michael Mlynash; Gregory W Albers; Maarten Lansberg; Robin Lemmens Journal: Stroke Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 7.914