BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Acute intraprocedural thrombus formation complicating endovascular cerebral aneurysm treatment is often treated with intra-arterial or intravenous administration of thrombolytic agents or glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (GpIIb/IIIa) inhibitors. We sought to evaluate the morbidity and mortality associated with such treatments using a large multihospital database. METHODS: Using the Premier Perspective Database, we examined outcomes for patients receiving endovascular coiling for ruptured and unruptured aneurysms requiring rescue therapy, defined as treatment with GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors and fibrinolytic therapy. We compared discharge status, length of stay, and complication rates across 3 groups: (1) patients receiving GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors only, (2) patients receiving fibrinolytic therapy only, and (3) patients receiving both GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors and fibrinolytics. Student t test was used to compare continuous variables, and Fisher exact test was used to compare categorical variables. RESULTS: Seven-percent (254/3627) of patients treated for unruptured aneurysms received rescue therapy. When compared with patients receiving GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors alone, patients receiving only fibrinolytics had significantly higher rates of discharge to institutions other than home (37.5% [9/24] versus 7.4% [15/201]; P<0.0001). Eight-percent of patients (338/4204) treated for ruptured aneurysms received rescue therapy. When compared with patients receiving GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors alone, patients receiving only fibrinolytics had significantly higher rates of mortality (26.0% [18/69] versus 14.5% [35/241]; P=0.02) and discharge to institutions other than home (59.4% [41/69] versus 36.5% [88/241]; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacological rescue therapy occurred in 7% to 8% of endovascular coiling patients with unruptured and ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Rescue therapy with thrombolytic agents resulted in significantly more morbidity and mortality than rescue therapy with GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Acute intraprocedural thrombus formation complicating endovascular cerebral aneurysm treatment is often treated with intra-arterial or intravenous administration of thrombolytic agents or glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (GpIIb/IIIa) inhibitors. We sought to evaluate the morbidity and mortality associated with such treatments using a large multihospital database. METHODS: Using the Premier Perspective Database, we examined outcomes for patients receiving endovascular coiling for ruptured and unruptured aneurysms requiring rescue therapy, defined as treatment with GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors and fibrinolytic therapy. We compared discharge status, length of stay, and complication rates across 3 groups: (1) patients receiving GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors only, (2) patients receiving fibrinolytic therapy only, and (3) patients receiving both GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors and fibrinolytics. Student t test was used to compare continuous variables, and Fisher exact test was used to compare categorical variables. RESULTS: Seven-percent (254/3627) of patients treated for unruptured aneurysms received rescue therapy. When compared with patients receiving GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors alone, patients receiving only fibrinolytics had significantly higher rates of discharge to institutions other than home (37.5% [9/24] versus 7.4% [15/201]; P<0.0001). Eight-percent of patients (338/4204) treated for ruptured aneurysms received rescue therapy. When compared with patients receiving GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors alone, patients receiving only fibrinolytics had significantly higher rates of mortality (26.0% [18/69] versus 14.5% [35/241]; P=0.02) and discharge to institutions other than home (59.4% [41/69] versus 36.5% [88/241]; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacological rescue therapy occurred in 7% to 8% of endovascular coiling patients with unruptured and ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Rescue therapy with thrombolytic agents resulted in significantly more morbidity and mortality than rescue therapy with GpIIb/IIIa inhibitors.
Authors: Samuel Pearce; Julian T Maingard; Hong Kuan Kok; Christen D Barras; Jeremy H Russell; Joshua A Hirsch; Ronil V Chandra; Ash Jhamb; Vincent Thijs; Mark Brooks; Hamed Asadi Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: J A Larco; M Abbasi; Y Liu; D Dai; G Lanzino; L E Savastano; H Cloft; D F Kallmes; R Kadirvel; W Brinjikji Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2021-12-16 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Jacques Sedat; Yves Chau; Lydiane Mondot; Richard Chemla; Michel Lonjon; Bernard Padovani Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2013-11-27 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Hyo Sub Jun; Jun Hyong Ahn; Ji Hee Kim; Jae Keun Oh; Joon Ho Song; In Bok Chang Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2016-04-11 Impact factor: 1.610