Ronen R Leker1, Stelios Pikis2, John M Gomori3, Jose E Cohen2. 1. Department of Neurology, Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel. Electronic address: leker@hadassah.org.il. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel. 3. Department of Neuroradiology, Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine whether bridging provides additional benefits over primary stentriever-based endovascular reperfusion (SER) in patients with proximal middle cerebral artery (pMCA) strokes. METHODS: Clinical and radiologic data from consecutive stroke patients with large anterior circulation infarcts involving the pMCA were analyzed. Stroke subtypes were categorized according to Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment criteria. Neurologic deficits were assessed with the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), and vessel recanalization was determined using the Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction scale at the end of SER. Good outcome was defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 2 or lesser. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients with a median age of 66 years were included. Of those, 24 received prior systemic tissue plasminogen activator and 33 received primary SER. Atrial fibrillation was more common in patients who underwent SER but there were no other between-group differences in baseline variables, procedure-related variables, or outcome parameters. Six patients died and 27 patients achieved an mRS of 2 or less at 90 days. Patients who were treated with tPA before SER needed less stentriever passes to recanalize the occluded vessel, but bridging did not impact the chances for either survival or favorable outcome. Age (odds ratio [OR], .92; 95% confidence interval [CI], .85-.98) and NIHSS score (OR, .12; 95% CI, .02-.78) were the only variables associated with outcome on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Primary SER and bridging resulted in equally high survival and good outcome rates. Our results suggest that the benefits of primary SER in such critically ill patients may bypass the need for bridging therapy and merit further study.
BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine whether bridging provides additional benefits over primary stentriever-based endovascular reperfusion (SER) in patients with proximal middle cerebral artery (pMCA) strokes. METHODS: Clinical and radiologic data from consecutive strokepatients with large anterior circulation infarcts involving the pMCA were analyzed. Stroke subtypes were categorized according to Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment criteria. Neurologic deficits were assessed with the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), and vessel recanalization was determined using the Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction scale at the end of SER. Good outcome was defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 2 or lesser. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients with a median age of 66 years were included. Of those, 24 received prior systemic tissue plasminogen activator and 33 received primary SER. Atrial fibrillation was more common in patients who underwent SER but there were no other between-group differences in baseline variables, procedure-related variables, or outcome parameters. Six patients died and 27 patients achieved an mRS of 2 or less at 90 days. Patients who were treated with tPA before SER needed less stentriever passes to recanalize the occluded vessel, but bridging did not impact the chances for either survival or favorable outcome. Age (odds ratio [OR], .92; 95% confidence interval [CI], .85-.98) and NIHSS score (OR, .12; 95% CI, .02-.78) were the only variables associated with outcome on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Primary SER and bridging resulted in equally high survival and good outcome rates. Our results suggest that the benefits of primary SER in such critically illpatients may bypass the need for bridging therapy and merit further study.
Authors: Georgios Tsivgoulis; Aristeidis H Katsanos; Dimitris Mavridis; Anne W Alexandrov; Georgios Magoufis; Adam Arthur; Valeria Caso; Peter D Schellinger; Andrei V Alexandrov Journal: Ther Adv Neurol Disord Date: 2016-12-01 Impact factor: 6.570
Authors: Ronen R Leker; Jose E Cohen; David Tanne; David Orion; Gregory Telman; Guy Raphaeli; Jacob Amsalem; Jonathan Y Streifler; Hen Hallevi; Pavel Gavriliuc; Natan M Bornstein; Anat Horev; Nour Eddine Yaghmour Journal: Interv Neurol Date: 2018-07-04
Authors: Amrou Sarraj; James Grotta; Gregory W Albers; Ameer E Hassan; Spiros Blackburn; Arthur Day; Clark Sitton; Michael Abraham; Chunyan Cai; Mark Dannenbaum; Deep Pujara; William Hicks; Ronald Budzik; Nirav Vora; Ashish Arora; Bader Alenzi; Wondwossen G Tekle; Haris Kamal; Osman Mir; Andrew D Barreto; Maarten Lansberg; Rishi Gupta; Sheryl Martin-Schild; Sean Savitz; Georgios Tsivgoulis Journal: Neurology Date: 2021-04-19 Impact factor: 11.800
Authors: Romain Bourcier; Mayank Goyal; David S Liebeskind; Keith W Muir; Hubert Desal; Adnan H Siddiqui; Diederik W J Dippel; Charles B Majoie; Wim H van Zwam; Tudor G Jovin; Elad I Levy; Peter J Mitchell; Olvert A Berkhemer; Stephen M Davis; Imad Derraz; Geoffrey A Donnan; Andrew M Demchuk; Robert J van Oostenbrugge; Michael Kelly; Yvo B Roos; Reza Jahan; Aad van der Lugt; Marieke Sprengers; Stephane Velasco; Geert J Lycklama À Nijeholt; Wagih Ben Hassen; Paul Burns; Scott Brown; Emmanuel Chabert; Timo Krings; Hana Choe; Christian Weimar; Bruce C V Campbell; Gary A Ford; Marc Ribo; Phil White; Geoffrey C Cloud; Luis San Roman; Antoni Davalos; Olivier Naggara; Michael D Hill; Serge Bracard Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: William Merritt; Anne Marie Holter; Sharna Beahm; Connor Gonzalez; Timothy A Becker; Aaron Tabor; Andrew F Ducruet; Laura S Bonsmann; Trevor R Cotter; Sergey Frenklakh Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2018-04-25 Impact factor: 8.572