Georgios Tsivgoulis1, Aristeidis H Katsanos2, Dimitris Mavridis3, Anne W Alexandrov4, Georgios Magoufis5, Adam Arthur6, Valeria Caso7, Peter D Schellinger8, Andrei V Alexandrov9. 1. Second Department of Neurology, Attikon University General Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Athens, Iras 39, Gerakas Attikis, Athens, 15344, Greece. 2. Second Department of Neurology, Attikon University General Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Athens, Athens, Greece Department of Neurology, University of Ioannina School of Medicine, Ioannina, Greece. 3. Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece. 4. Department of Neurology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA Australian Catholic University, Sydney, Australia. 5. Acute Stroke Unit and Department of Interventional Neuroradiology, Metropolitan Hospital, Piraeus, Greece. 6. Department of Neurosurgery, Semmes-Murphey Neurologic and Spine Institute, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA. 7. Stroke Unit, University of Perugia, Santa Maria della Misericordia Hospital, Perugia, Italy. 8. Departments of Neurology and Neurogeriatry, Johannes Wesling Medical Center, Minden, Germany. 9. Department of Neurology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Current recommendations advocate that pretreatment with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) should first be offered to all eligible patients with emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO) before an endovascular thrombectomy (ET) procedure. However, there are observational data that question the safety and efficacy of IVT pretreatment in patients with ELVO. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of the included subgroups from ET randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the comparative efficacy between direct ET without IVT pretreatment and bridging therapy (IVT and ET) in patients with ELVO. RESULTS: We included a total of seven RCTs, including 1764 patients with ELVO (52.8% men). Patients receiving bridging therapy (IVT followed by ET) had lower rates (p = 0.041) of 90-day death/severe dependency (modified Rankin Scale-score of 5-6; 19.0%, 95% CI: 14.1-25.1%) compared with patients receiving only ET (31.0%, 95% CI: 21.2-42.9%). Moreover, patients receiving IVT and ET had a nonsignificant (p = 0.389) trend towards higher 90-day functional independence rates (51.4%, 95% CI: 42.5-60.1%) compared with patients undergoing only ET (41.7%, 95% CI: 24.1-61.7%). Finally, shift-analysis uncovered a nonsignificant trend towards functional improvement at 90 days for bridging therapy over ET (cOR = 1.28, 95% CI: 0.91-1.89; p = 0.155). It should be noted that patients included in the present meta-analysis were not randomized to receive IVT, and thus the two groups (bridging therapy versus ET monotherapy) may differ in terms of baseline characteristics and, in particular, in terms of onset to groin puncture time and thus the risk of confounding bias cannot be ruled out. CONCLUSION: Despite the limitations and the risk of confounding bias, our findings contradict the recent notion regarding potential equality between ET and bridging therapy in ELVO patients and suggest that IVT and ET are complementary therapies that should be pursued in a parallel and noncompeting fashion.
OBJECTIVES: Current recommendations advocate that pretreatment with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) should first be offered to all eligible patients with emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO) before an endovascular thrombectomy (ET) procedure. However, there are observational data that question the safety and efficacy of IVT pretreatment in patients with ELVO. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of the included subgroups from ET randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the comparative efficacy between direct ET without IVT pretreatment and bridging therapy (IVT and ET) in patients with ELVO. RESULTS: We included a total of seven RCTs, including 1764 patients with ELVO (52.8% men). Patients receiving bridging therapy (IVT followed by ET) had lower rates (p = 0.041) of 90-day death/severe dependency (modified Rankin Scale-score of 5-6; 19.0%, 95% CI: 14.1-25.1%) compared with patients receiving only ET (31.0%, 95% CI: 21.2-42.9%). Moreover, patients receiving IVT and ET had a nonsignificant (p = 0.389) trend towards higher 90-day functional independence rates (51.4%, 95% CI: 42.5-60.1%) compared with patients undergoing only ET (41.7%, 95% CI: 24.1-61.7%). Finally, shift-analysis uncovered a nonsignificant trend towards functional improvement at 90 days for bridging therapy over ET (cOR = 1.28, 95% CI: 0.91-1.89; p = 0.155). It should be noted that patients included in the present meta-analysis were not randomized to receive IVT, and thus the two groups (bridging therapy versus ET monotherapy) may differ in terms of baseline characteristics and, in particular, in terms of onset to groin puncture time and thus the risk of confounding bias cannot be ruled out. CONCLUSION: Despite the limitations and the risk of confounding bias, our findings contradict the recent notion regarding potential equality between ET and bridging therapy in ELVO patients and suggest that IVT and ET are complementary therapies that should be pursued in a parallel and noncompeting fashion.
Authors: Jens Fiehler; Christophe Cognard; Mauro Gallitelli; Olav Jansen; Adam Kobayashi; Heinrich P Mattle; Keith W Muir; Mikael Mazighi; Karl Schaller; Peter D Schellinger Journal: Int J Stroke Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 5.266
Authors: Mayank Goyal; Bijoy K Menon; Wim H van Zwam; Diederik W J Dippel; Peter J Mitchell; Andrew M Demchuk; Antoni Dávalos; Charles B L M Majoie; Aad van der Lugt; Maria A de Miquel; Geoffrey A Donnan; Yvo B W E M Roos; Alain Bonafe; Reza Jahan; Hans-Christoph Diener; Lucie A van den Berg; Elad I Levy; Olvert A Berkhemer; Vitor M Pereira; Jeremy Rempel; Mònica Millán; Stephen M Davis; Daniel Roy; John Thornton; Luis San Román; Marc Ribó; Debbie Beumer; Bruce Stouch; Scott Brown; Bruce C V Campbell; Robert J van Oostenbrugge; Jeffrey L Saver; Michael D Hill; Tudor G Jovin Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-02-18 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Georgios Tsivgoulis; Ramin Zand; Aristeidis H Katsanos; Nitin Goyal; Ken Uchino; Jason Chang; Efthimios Dardiotis; Jukka Putaala; Anne W Alexandrov; Marc D Malkoff; Andrei V Alexandrov Journal: Stroke Date: 2015-03-19 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Jeffrey L Saver; Mayank Goyal; Alain Bonafe; Hans-Christoph Diener; Elad I Levy; Vitor M Pereira; Gregory W Albers; Christophe Cognard; David J Cohen; Werner Hacke; Olav Jansen; Tudor G Jovin; Heinrich P Mattle; Raul G Nogueira; Adnan H Siddiqui; Dileep R Yavagal; Blaise W Baxter; Thomas G Devlin; Demetrius K Lopes; Vivek K Reddy; Richard du Mesnil de Rochemont; Oliver C Singer; Reza Jahan Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-04-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Bruce C V Campbell; Peter J Mitchell; Timothy J Kleinig; Helen M Dewey; Leonid Churilov; Nawaf Yassi; Bernard Yan; Richard J Dowling; Mark W Parsons; Thomas J Oxley; Teddy Y Wu; Mark Brooks; Marion A Simpson; Ferdinand Miteff; Christopher R Levi; Martin Krause; Timothy J Harrington; Kenneth C Faulder; Brendan S Steinfort; Miriam Priglinger; Timothy Ang; Rebecca Scroop; P Alan Barber; Ben McGuinness; Tissa Wijeratne; Thanh G Phan; Winston Chong; Ronil V Chandra; Christopher F Bladin; Monica Badve; Henry Rice; Laetitia de Villiers; Henry Ma; Patricia M Desmond; Geoffrey A Donnan; Stephen M Davis Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-02-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: M Uyttenboogaart; R E Stewart; P C Vroomen; G-J Luijckx; J De Keyser Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2008-04-17 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Joseph P Broderick; Yuko Y Palesch; Andrew M Demchuk; Sharon D Yeatts; Pooja Khatri; Michael D Hill; Edward C Jauch; Tudor G Jovin; Bernard Yan; Frank L Silver; Rüdiger von Kummer; Carlos A Molina; Bart M Demaerschalk; Ronald Budzik; Wayne M Clark; Osama O Zaidat; Tim W Malisch; Mayank Goyal; Wouter J Schonewille; Mikael Mazighi; Stefan T Engelter; Craig Anderson; Judith Spilker; Janice Carrozzella; Karla J Ryckborst; L Scott Janis; Renée H Martin; Lydia D Foster; Thomas A Tomsick Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-02-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: William J Powers; Colin P Derdeyn; José Biller; Christopher S Coffey; Brian L Hoh; Edward C Jauch; Karen C Johnston; S Claiborne Johnston; Alexander A Khalessi; Chelsea S Kidwell; James F Meschia; Bruce Ovbiagele; Dileep R Yavagal Journal: Stroke Date: 2015-06-29 Impact factor: 10.170
Authors: Carmen Serna Candel; Marta Aguilar Pérez; Victoria Hellstern; Muhammad AlMatter; Hansjörg Bäzner; Hans Henkes Journal: Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2019-11-20 Impact factor: 2.762
Authors: J A Smaal; I R de Ridder; A Heshmatollah; W H van Zwam; Dwj Dippel; C B Majoie; S Brown; M Goyal; Bcv Campbell; K W Muir; A M Demchuck; A Davalos; T G Jovin; P J Mitchell; P White; J L Saver; M D Hill; Y B Roos; A van der Lugt; R J van Oostenbrugge Journal: Eur Stroke J Date: 2020-05-13
Authors: Georgios Tsivgoulis; Aristeidis H Katsanos; Peter D Schellinger; Martin Köhrmann; Panayiotis Varelas; Georgios Magoufis; Maurizio Paciaroni; Valeria Caso; Anne W Alexandrov; Edip Gurol; Andrei V Alexandrov Journal: Stroke Date: 2017-12-06 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Louise E Craig; Sandy Middleton; Helen Hamilton; Fern Cudlip; Victoria Swatzell; Andrei V Alexandrov; Elizabeth Lightbody; Dame Caroline Watkins; Sheeba Philip; Dominique A Cadilhac; Elizabeth McInnes; Simeon Dale; Anne W Alexandrov Journal: Interv Neurol Date: 2018-09-25
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: Jan Christoph Purrucker; Miriam Heyse; Simon Nagel; Christoph Gumbinger; Fatih Seker; Markus Möhlenbruch; Peter Arthur Ringleb Journal: Stroke Vasc Neurol Date: 2021-07-26