Bruce C V Campbell1, Charles B L M Majoie2, Gregory W Albers3, Bijoy K Menon4, Nawaf Yassi5, Gagan Sharma6, Wim H van Zwam7, Robert J van Oostenbrugge8, Andrew M Demchuk4, Francis Guillemin9, Philip White10, Antoni Dávalos11, Aad van der Lugt12, Kenneth S Butcher13, Aboubaker Cherifi14, Henk A Marquering15, Geoffrey Cloud16, Juan M Macho Fernández17, Jeremy Madigan18, Catherine Oppenheim19, Geoffrey A Donnan20, Yvo B W E M Roos21, Jai Shankar22, Hester Lingsma23, Alain Bonafé24, Hélène Raoult25, María Hernández-Pérez11, Aditya Bharatha26, Reza Jahan27, Olav Jansen28, Sébastien Richard29, Elad I Levy30, Olvert A Berkhemer31, Marc Soudant9, Lucia Aja32, Stephen M Davis6, Timo Krings33, Marie Tisserand34, Luis San Román16, Alejandro Tomasello35, Debbie Beumer7, Scott Brown36, David S Liebeskind37, Serge Bracard38, Keith W Muir39, Diederik W J Dippel40, Mayank Goyal41, Jeffrey L Saver42, Tudor G Jovin43, Michael D Hill4, Peter J Mitchell44. 1. Department of Medicine and Neurology, Melbourne Brain Centre, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: bruce.campbell@mh.org.au. 2. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 3. Stanford Stroke Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. 4. Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Hotchkiss Brain Institute, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Foothills Hospital, Calgary, AB, Canada. 5. Department of Medicine and Neurology, Melbourne Brain Centre, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia; The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia. 6. Department of Medicine and Neurology, Melbourne Brain Centre, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia. 7. Department of Radiology, Maastricht University Medical Center and Cardiovascular Research Institute (CARIM), Maastricht, Netherlands. 8. Department of Neurology, Maastricht University Medical Center and Cardiovascular Research Institute (CARIM), Maastricht, Netherlands. 9. Clinical Investigation Centre-Clinical Epidemiology, INSERM 1433, University of Lorraine and University Hospital of Nancy, Nancy, France. 10. Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. 11. Department of Neuroscience, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 12. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands. 13. Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada. 14. Clinical Investigation Centre-Innovative Technology, INSERM 1433, University of Lorraine and University Hospital of Nancy, Nancy, France. 15. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Biomedical Engineering and Physics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 16. Stroke Unit, Alfred Hospital and Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 17. Department of Radiology, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain. 18. Department of Neuroradiology, Atkinson Morley Regional Neuroscience Centre, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. 19. Department of Neuroradiology, Sainte-Anne Hospital and Paris-Descartes University, INSERM U894, Paris, France. 20. The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia. 21. Department of Neurology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 22. Department of Radiology, QEII Health Science Center, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada. 23. Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands. 24. Department of Neuroradiology, Hôpital Gui-de Chauliac, Montpellier, France. 25. Department of Neuroradiology, CHU Pontchaillou, Rennes, France. 26. Division of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Department of Medical Imaging, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 27. Division of Interventional Neuroradiology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 28. Department of Radiology and Neuroradiology, Universitätsklinikum Kiel, Kiel, Germany. 29. Department of Neurology, Stroke Unit, CIC-1433, INSERM U1116, University Hospital of Nancy, Nancy, France. 30. Department of Neurosurgery, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA. 31. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Radiology, Maastricht University Medical Center and Cardiovascular Research Institute (CARIM), Maastricht, Netherlands; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Department of Neurology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands. 32. Department of Neurology, Hospital de Bellvitge, Barcelona, Spain. 33. Department of Radiology, Toronto Western Hospital and University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 34. Department of Neuroradiology, Foch Hospital, Suresnes, France. 35. Radiology Department, Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain. 36. Altair Biostatistics, St Louis Park, MN, USA. 37. Neurovascular Imaging Research Core, Department of Neurology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 38. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, INSERM U 947, University of Lorraine and University Hospital of Nancy, Nancy, France. 39. Institute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK. 40. Department of Neurology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands. 41. Department of Radiology, University of Calgary, Foothills Hospital, Calgary, AB, Canada. 42. Department of Neurology and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 43. Stroke Institute, Department of Neurology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 44. Department of Radiology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: CT perfusion (CTP) and diffusion or perfusion MRI might assist patient selection for endovascular thrombectomy. We aimed to establish whether imaging assessments of irreversibly injured ischaemic core and potentially salvageable penumbra volumes were associated with functional outcome and whether they interacted with the treatment effect of endovascular thrombectomy on functional outcome. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the HERMES collaboration pooled patient-level data from all randomised controlled trials that compared endovascular thrombectomy (predominantly using stent retrievers) with standard medical therapy in patients with anterior circulation ischaemic stroke, published in PubMed from Jan 1, 2010, to May 31, 2017. The primary endpoint was functional outcome, assessed by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days after stroke. Ischaemic core was estimated, before treatment with either endovascular thrombectomy or standard medical therapy, by CTP as relative cerebral blood flow less than 30% of normal brain blood flow or by MRI as an apparent diffusion coefficient less than 620 μm2/s. Critically hypoperfused tissue was estimated as the volume of tissue with a CTP time to maximum longer than 6 s. Mismatch volume (ie, the estimated penumbral volume) was calculated as critically hypoperfused tissue volume minus ischaemic core volume. The association of ischaemic core and penumbral volumes with 90-day mRS score was analysed with multivariable logistic regression (functional independence, defined as mRS score 0-2) and ordinal logistic regression (functional improvement by at least one mRS category) in all patients and in a subset of those with more than 50% endovascular reperfusion, adjusted for baseline prognostic variables. The meta-analysis was prospectively designed by the HERMES executive committee, but not registered. FINDINGS: We identified seven studies with 1764 patients, all of which were included in the meta-analysis. CTP was available and assessable for 591 (34%) patients and diffusion MRI for 309 (18%) patients. Functional independence was worse in patients who had CTP versus those who had diffusion MRI, after adjustment for ischaemic core volume (odds ratio [OR] 0·47 [95% CI 0·30-0·72], p=0·0007), so the imaging modalities were not pooled. Increasing ischaemic core volume was associated with reduced likelihood of functional independence (CTP OR 0·77 [0·69-0·86] per 10 mL, pinteraction=0·29; diffusion MRI OR 0·87 [0·81-0·94] per 10 mL, pinteraction=0·94). Mismatch volume, examined only in the CTP group because of the small numbers of patients who had perfusion MRI, was not associated with either functional independence or functional improvement. In patients with CTP with more than 50% endovascular reperfusion (n=186), age, ischaemic core volume, and imaging-to-reperfusion time were independently associated with functional improvement. Risk of bias between studies was generally low. INTERPRETATION: Estimated ischaemic core volume was independently associated with functional independence and functional improvement but did not modify the treatment benefit of endovascular thrombectomy over standard medical therapy for improved functional outcome. Combining ischaemic core volume with age and expected imaging-to-reperfusion time will improve assessment of prognosis and might inform endovascular thrombectomy treatment decisions. FUNDING: Medtronic.
BACKGROUND: CT perfusion (CTP) and diffusion or perfusion MRI might assist patient selection for endovascular thrombectomy. We aimed to establish whether imaging assessments of irreversibly injured ischaemic core and potentially salvageable penumbra volumes were associated with functional outcome and whether they interacted with the treatment effect of endovascular thrombectomy on functional outcome. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the HERMES collaboration pooled patient-level data from all randomised controlled trials that compared endovascular thrombectomy (predominantly using stent retrievers) with standard medical therapy in patients with anterior circulation ischaemic stroke, published in PubMed from Jan 1, 2010, to May 31, 2017. The primary endpoint was functional outcome, assessed by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days after stroke. Ischaemic core was estimated, before treatment with either endovascular thrombectomy or standard medical therapy, by CTP as relative cerebral blood flow less than 30% of normal brain blood flow or by MRI as an apparent diffusion coefficient less than 620 μm2/s. Critically hypoperfused tissue was estimated as the volume of tissue with a CTP time to maximum longer than 6 s. Mismatch volume (ie, the estimated penumbral volume) was calculated as critically hypoperfused tissue volume minus ischaemic core volume. The association of ischaemic core and penumbral volumes with 90-day mRS score was analysed with multivariable logistic regression (functional independence, defined as mRS score 0-2) and ordinal logistic regression (functional improvement by at least one mRS category) in all patients and in a subset of those with more than 50% endovascular reperfusion, adjusted for baseline prognostic variables. The meta-analysis was prospectively designed by the HERMES executive committee, but not registered. FINDINGS: We identified seven studies with 1764 patients, all of which were included in the meta-analysis. CTP was available and assessable for 591 (34%) patients and diffusion MRI for 309 (18%) patients. Functional independence was worse in patients who had CTP versus those who had diffusion MRI, after adjustment for ischaemic core volume (odds ratio [OR] 0·47 [95% CI 0·30-0·72], p=0·0007), so the imaging modalities were not pooled. Increasing ischaemic core volume was associated with reduced likelihood of functional independence (CTP OR 0·77 [0·69-0·86] per 10 mL, pinteraction=0·29; diffusion MRI OR 0·87 [0·81-0·94] per 10 mL, pinteraction=0·94). Mismatch volume, examined only in the CTP group because of the small numbers of patients who had perfusion MRI, was not associated with either functional independence or functional improvement. In patients with CTP with more than 50% endovascular reperfusion (n=186), age, ischaemic core volume, and imaging-to-reperfusion time were independently associated with functional improvement. Risk of bias between studies was generally low. INTERPRETATION: Estimated ischaemic core volume was independently associated with functional independence and functional improvement but did not modify the treatment benefit of endovascular thrombectomy over standard medical therapy for improved functional outcome. Combining ischaemic core volume with age and expected imaging-to-reperfusion time will improve assessment of prognosis and might inform endovascular thrombectomy treatment decisions. FUNDING: Medtronic.
Authors: H Raoult; M V Lassalle; B Parat; C Rousseau; F Eugène; S Vannier; S Evain; A Le Bras; T Ronziere; J C Ferre; J Y Gauvrit; B Laviolle Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-01-30 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: D Michalski; C Jungk; T Brenner; M Dietrich; C Nusshag; M A Weigand; C J Reuß; C Beynon; M Bernhard Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: Alyson R Plecash; Amokrane Chebini; Alvin Ip; Joshua J Lai; Andrew A Mattar; Jason Randhawa; Thalia S Field Journal: Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep Date: 2019-11-13 Impact factor: 5.081
Authors: Bruce C V Campbell; Peter J Mitchell; Leonid Churilov; Nawaf Yassi; Timothy J Kleinig; Richard J Dowling; Bernard Yan; Steven J Bush; Vincent Thijs; Rebecca Scroop; Marion Simpson; Mark Brooks; Hamed Asadi; Teddy Y Wu; Darshan G Shah; Tissa Wijeratne; Henry Zhao; Fana Alemseged; Felix Ng; Peter Bailey; Henry Rice; Laetitia de Villiers; Helen M Dewey; Philip M C Choi; Helen Brown; Kendal Redmond; David Leggett; John N Fink; Wayne Collecutt; Thomas Kraemer; Martin Krause; Dennis Cordato; Deborah Field; Henry Ma; Bill O'Brien; Benjamin Clissold; Ferdinand Miteff; Anna Clissold; Geoffrey C Cloud; Leslie E Bolitho; Luke Bonavia; Arup Bhattacharya; Alistair Wright; Abul Mamun; Fintan O'Rourke; John Worthington; Andrew A Wong; Christopher R Levi; Christopher F Bladin; Gagan Sharma; Patricia M Desmond; Mark W Parsons; Geoffrey A Donnan; Stephen M Davis Journal: JAMA Date: 2020-04-07 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Bhavya Rehani; Simon G Ammanuel; Yi Zhang; Wade Smith; Daniel L Cooke; Steven W Hetts; S Andrew Josephson; Anthony Kim; J Claude Hemphill; William Dillon Journal: Neurohospitalist Date: 2019-08-19