| Literature DB >> 31191440 |
Zibao Li1, Zhaohu Chu1, Shoucai Zhao1, Lingsong Ma1, Qian Yang1, Xianjun Huang1, Zhiming Zhou1.
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Endovascular thrombectomy improves the functional independence of patients with proximal anterior circulation occlusion. However, a subset of patients fail to benefit from thrombectomy procedures, the reasons for which remain poorly defined. In this study, we investigated whether the effectiveness of thrombectomy was affected by left- or right-sided occlusion among patients with similar stroke severities.Entities:
Keywords: intervention; sides of occlusion; stent; stroke; thrombectomy
Year: 2019 PMID: 31191440 PMCID: PMC6546891 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2019.00551
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Baseline characteristics of patients with proximal anterior circulation occlusion.
| Age, mean (SD), year | 69.6 (10.2) | 67.6 (12.0) | 0.240 |
| Male sex | 41 (45.6) | 48 (57.1) | 0.127 |
| Admission NIHSS score, median (IQR) | 19 (16–20) | 15 (13–18) | < 0.001 |
| Hypertension | 66 (73.3) | 57 (67.9) | 0.428 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 14 (15.6) | 10 (11.9) | 0.485 |
| Atrial fibrillation | 60 (66.7) | 46 (54.8) | 0.108 |
| Systolic BP, mean (SD), mm Hg | 144 (22.7) | 142 (24.2) | 0.171 |
| diastolic BP, mean (SD), mm Hg | 83 (13.5) | 84 (14.0) | 0.784 |
| Glucose level, median (IQR), mmol/L | 6.4 (5.1–9.1) | 6.5 (5.4–8.2) | 0.983 |
| TOAST | 0.885 | ||
| Large artery disease | 20 (22.2) | 21 (25.0) | |
| Cardioembolic | 61 (67.8) | 54 (64.3) | |
| Other etiology | 9 (10.0%) | 9 (10.7) | |
| ASPECTS, median (IQR) | 8 (8–10) | 8 (8–9) | 0.659 |
| Site of occlusion, most proximal | 0.250 | ||
| Intracranial ICA | 33 (36.7) | 38 (45.2) | |
| MCA-M1 | 57 (63.3) | 46 (54.8) | |
| IV-rtPA, no. (%) | 13 (14.4) | 5 (6.0) | 0.066 |
| Good collaterals, no. (%) | 31 (34.4) | 30 (35.7) | 0.861 |
| Stroke onset to groin puncture (IQR), min | 240 (200–300) | 265 (210–300) | 0.622 |
| Procedural time, median (IQR), min | 60 (40–90) | 60 (46–90) | 0.447 |
| Time to reperfusion, median (IQR), min | 325 (275–370) | 330 (270–370) | 0.457 |
| Successful recanalization (mTICI), no. (%) | 75 (83.3) | 67 (79.8) | 0.543 |
| Symptomatic ICH, no. (%) | 8 (8.9) | 15 (17.9) | 0.081 |
| Asymptomatic ICH, no. (%) | 12 (13.3) | 11 (13.1) | 0.963 |
ASPECTS, the Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score; BP, blood pressure; Good collaterals defined as American Society of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology/Society of Interventional Radiology (ASITN/SIR) ≥ 3; ICA, internal carotid artery; ICH, intracranial hemorrhage; IQR, interquartile range; IV-rtPA, intravenous alteplase; MCA, middle cerebral artery; mTICI, modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction; NIHSS, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; SD, standard deviation; TOAST, Trial of Org 10 172 in acute stroke treatment.
Figure 1Distribution of scores on the modified rankin scale at 90 days. Shown is the distribution of 90-days modified Rankin scale ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 6 (death) in all enrolled patients with left- or right-sided occlusion undergoing endovascular thrombectomy (A) and in subgroups defined according to stroke severity on admission, (B) patients with NIHSS score (5 to 14) and (C) patients with NIHSS score (≥ 15).
Multivariable analysis of left or right-sided occlusion with functional outcomes.
| 5 ≤ NIHSS < 15 | 14 | 38 | ||||
| 90-d mRS score 0–2, No. (%) | 8 (57.1) | 24 (63.2) | 0.280 | 0.3 (0.03–2.67) | 0.364 | 0.34 (0.03–3.54) |
| Death, No. (%) | 3 (21.4) | 7 (18.4) | 0.959 | 0.95 (0.16–5.75) | 0.694 | 1.58 (0.16–15.17) |
| NIHSS ≥ 15 | 76 | 46 | ||||
| 90-d mRS score 0–2, No. (%) | 30 (39.5) | 9 (19.6) | 0.008 | 4.66 (1.49–14.63) | 0.032 | 4.23 (1.13–16.01) |
| Death, No. (%) | 22 (28.9) | 22 (47.8) | 0.012 | 0.31 (0.12–0.77) | 0.046 | 0.38 (0.14–0.98) |
NIHSS, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; mRS modified Rankin Scale.
Model 1: Incorporated were parameters of demographic and clinical characteristics with P < 0.1 in univariate analysis (Supplementary Tables 1, 2).
Model 2: Incorporated were parameters of Model 1+ intervention parameters and complications with P < 0.1 in univariate analysis (Supplementary Tables 1, 2).