BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Endovascular therapy of acute ischemic stroke has been shown to be beneficial for selected patients. The purpose of this study is to determine predictors of outcome in a large cohort of patients treated with intra-arterial thrombolysis, mechanical revascularization techniques, or both. METHODS: We prospectively acquired data for 623 patients with acute cerebral infarcts in the carotid artery territory who received endovascular treatment at a single center. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictors of outcome. RESULTS: Median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) at admission was 15. Partial or complete recanalization was achieved in 70.3% of patients; it was independently associated with hypercholesterolemia (P=0.02), absence of coronary artery disease (P=0.023), and more proximal occlusion site (P<0.0001). After 3 months, 80.5% of patients had survived, and 48.9% of patients reached favorable outcome (modified Rankin scale score 0-2). Good collaterals (P<0.0001), recanalization (P=0.023), hypercholesterolemia (P=0.03), lower NIHSS at admission (P=0.001), and younger age (P<0.0001) were independent predictors for survival. More peripheral occlusion site (P<0.0001), recanalization (P<0.0001), hypercholesterolemia (P=0.002), good collaterals (P=0.002), lower NIHSS (P<0.0001), younger age (P<0.0001), absence of diabetes (P=0.002), and no previous antithrombotic therapy (P=0.036) predicted favorable outcome. Time to treatment was only a predictor of outcome, when collaterals were excluded from the model. Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage occurred in 5.5% and was independently predicted by poor collaterals (P=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Several independent predictors for outcome and complications were identified. Unlike in intravenous thrombolysis trials, time to treatment was a predictor of outcome only when collaterals were excluded from the model, indicating the important role of collaterals for the time window.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Endovascular therapy of acute ischemic stroke has been shown to be beneficial for selected patients. The purpose of this study is to determine predictors of outcome in a large cohort of patients treated with intra-arterial thrombolysis, mechanical revascularization techniques, or both. METHODS: We prospectively acquired data for 623 patients with acute cerebral infarcts in the carotid artery territory who received endovascular treatment at a single center. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictors of outcome. RESULTS: Median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) at admission was 15. Partial or complete recanalization was achieved in 70.3% of patients; it was independently associated with hypercholesterolemia (P=0.02), absence of coronary artery disease (P=0.023), and more proximal occlusion site (P<0.0001). After 3 months, 80.5% of patients had survived, and 48.9% of patients reached favorable outcome (modified Rankin scale score 0-2). Good collaterals (P<0.0001), recanalization (P=0.023), hypercholesterolemia (P=0.03), lower NIHSS at admission (P=0.001), and younger age (P<0.0001) were independent predictors for survival. More peripheral occlusion site (P<0.0001), recanalization (P<0.0001), hypercholesterolemia (P=0.002), good collaterals (P=0.002), lower NIHSS (P<0.0001), younger age (P<0.0001), absence of diabetes (P=0.002), and no previous antithrombotic therapy (P=0.036) predicted favorable outcome. Time to treatment was only a predictor of outcome, when collaterals were excluded from the model. Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage occurred in 5.5% and was independently predicted by poor collaterals (P=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Several independent predictors for outcome and complications were identified. Unlike in intravenous thrombolysis trials, time to treatment was a predictor of outcome only when collaterals were excluded from the model, indicating the important role of collaterals for the time window.
Authors: Richard McKinley; Levin Häni; Jan Gralla; M El-Koussy; S Bauer; M Arnold; U Fischer; S Jung; Kaspar Mattmann; Mauricio Reyes; Roland Wiest Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2016-01-01 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Benjamin Okyere; William A Mills; Xia Wang; Michael Chen; Jiang Chen; Amanda Hazy; Yun Qian; John B Matson; Michelle H Theus Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2020-02-03 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Pooja Khatri; Sharon D Yeatts; Mikael Mazighi; Joseph P Broderick; David S Liebeskind; Andrew M Demchuk; Pierre Amarenco; Janice Carrozzella; Judith Spilker; Lydia D Foster; Mayank Goyal; Michael D Hill; Yuko Y Palesch; Edward C Jauch; E Clarke Haley; Achala Vagal; Thomas A Tomsick Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2014-04-27 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Robin Lemmens; Michael Mlynash; Matus Straka; Stephanie Kemp; Roland Bammer; Michael P Marks; Gregory W Albers; Maarten G Lansberg Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-07-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: K Nael; A Doshi; R De Leacy; J Puig; M Castellanos; J Bederson; T P Naidich; J Mocco; M Wintermark Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 3.825