Feng Gao 1 , Xu Guo 2 , Xuan Sun 3 , Yan Liu 4 , Yingchun Wu 5 , Zhongrong Miao 3 Show Affiliations »
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for medically refractory non-acute intracranial artery occlusion is uncertain, and endovascular recanalization remains a technical challenge. Here, a multicenter clinical experience of dual-roadmap guidance for endovascular recanalization of non-acute intracranial artery occlusion is reported, focusing on the technical feasibility and safety. METHODS: From January 2014 to December 2019, 52 consecutive patients with medically refractory atherosclerotic non-acute intracranial artery occlusion who underwent endovascular recanalization under dual-roadmap guidance in three large regional referral stroke centers were analyzed retrospectively. Four types of dual-roadmap technical schemes were applied during endovascular recanalization. The rates of technical success, periprocedural complications, any stroke or death within 30 days, and follow-up results were evaluated. RESULTS: The technical success rate was 92.3% (48/52). The perioperative complication rate was 7.7% (4/52), and the rate of any stroke or death within 30 days was 3.8% (2/52). Asymptomatic dissection occurred in two patients, acute in-stent thrombosis followed by postoperative mild stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) 3) in one patient, and death due to reperfusion hemorrhage after successful recanalization in one patient. The rate of stroke or death beyond 30 days was 6.5% (3/46). The median clinical follow-up period was 19 months, and the median imaging follow-up period was 12 months. The restenosis rate was 13.2% (5/38). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular recanalization of non-acute intracranial occlusions can be performed with a high rate of technical success and few complications with assistance of the dual-roadmap technique for navigation. Four types of dual-roadmap schemes provide technical references. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for medically refractory non-acute intracranial artery occlusion is uncertain, and endovascular recanalization remains a technical challenge. Here, a multicenter clinical experience of dual-roadmap guidance for endovascular recanalization of non-acute intracranial artery occlusion is reported, focusing on the technical feasibility and safety. METHODS: From January 2014 to December 2019, 52 consecutive patients with medically refractory atherosclerotic non-acute intracranial artery occlusion who underwent endovascular recanalization under dual-roadmap guidance in three large regional referral stroke centers were analyzed retrospectively. Four types of dual-roadmap technical schemes were applied during endovascular recanalization. The rates of technical success, periprocedural complications, any stroke or death within 30 days, and follow-up results were evaluated. RESULTS: The technical success rate was 92.3% (48/52). The perioperative complication rate was 7.7% (4/52), and the rate of any stroke or death within 30 days was 3.8% (2/52). Asymptomatic dissection occurred in two patients, acute in-stent thrombosis followed by postoperative mild stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) 3) in one patient, and death due to reperfusion hemorrhage after successful recanalization in one patient. The rate of stroke or death beyond 30 days was 6.5% (3/46). The median clinical follow-up period was 19 months, and the median imaging follow-up period was 12 months. The restenosis rate was 13.2% (5/38). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular recanalization of non-acute intracranial occlusions can be performed with a high rate of technical success and few complications with assistance of the dual-roadmap technique for navigation. Four types of dual-roadmap schemes provide technical references. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Entities: Chemical
Keywords:
angioplasty; atherosclerosis; stent; stroke; technique
Mesh： See more »
Year: 2020
PMID： 33106320 DOI： 10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-016754
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Neurointerv Surg ISSN： 1759-8478 Impact factor: 5.836