| Literature DB >> 33997031 |
Hongmin Gong1,2, Libo Zhao1,2, Ge Tang1,2, Yu Chen1,2, Deyu Yang1,2, Shudong Liu1,2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Currently, the standard treatment modality for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) presenting with isolated M2 occlusions is not specific. We therefore assessed the difference in treatment outcomes for patients with isolated M2 occlusions.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33997031 PMCID: PMC8096556 DOI: 10.1155/2021/6626604
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Baseline patient characteristics.
| Characteristics | NRT ( | IVT ( | EVT ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, mean ± SD, years | 75.16 ± 7.60 | 79.41 ± 7.36 | 67.61 ± 11.43 | 12.42a | <0.01 |
| Male (%) | 13 (52) | 12 (44.44) | 11 (61.11) | 1.21b | 0.547 |
| Left hemisphere (%) | 17 (68) | 15 (55.56) | 13 (72.22) | 1.54b | 0.463 |
| rLMCs, median (IQR) | 15 (12, 17) | 17 (14.7, 19) | 16 (14, 18) | 4.76a | 0.105 |
| Admission NIHSS score, median (IQR) | 12 (7.5, 20.5) | 11 (9, 15) | 14 (9, 17.5) | 2.42a | 0.298 |
| Admission NIHSS score stratification (%) | |||||
| <13 | 13 (52) | 18 (66.67) | 8 (44.44) | 4.70c | 0.095 |
| 13-19 | 5 (20) | 9 (33.33) | 9 (50) | ||
| ≥ 20 | 7 (28) | 0 | 1 (5.56) | ||
| Vascular risk factors | |||||
| Hypertension (%) | 15 (60) | 11 (40.74) | 5 (27.78) | 4.63b | 0.099 |
| Diabetes (%) | 4 (16) | 6 (22.22) | 5 (27.78) | 0.88b | 0.644 |
| Hyperlipidemia (%) | 8 (32) | 3 (11.11) | 7 (38.89) | 5.17b | 0.076 |
| Coronary heart disease (%) | 3 (12) | 8 (29.63) | 4 (22.22) | 2.41b | 0.30 |
| Congestive heart failure (%) | 5 (20) | 2 (7.41) | 5 (27.78) | 3.47d | 0.171 |
| Atrial fibrillation (%) | 8 (32) | 8 (29.63) | 10 (55.56) | 3.55b | 0.186 |
| History of ischemic stroke (%) | 4 (16) | 4 (14.81) | 1 (5.56) | 1.13d | 0.668 |
| Drinking (%) | 1 (4) | 2 (7.41) | 3 (16.67) | 2.08d | 0.428 |
| Smoking (%) | 4 (16) | 3 (11.11) | 6 (33.33) | 3.42d | 0.166 |
| Antiplatelet drugs are currently used (%) | 1 (4) | 0 | 3 (16.67) | 4.62d | 0.059 |
| Statins are currently used (%) | 1 (4) | 0 | 3 (16.67) | 4.62d | 0.059 |
| Admission serum glucose level, mean ± SD, mmol/l | 8.06 ± 4.72 | 7.58 ± 2.39 | 7.71 ± 2.43 | 0.42a | 0.81 |
| Admission systolic blood pressure, mean ± SD, mmHg | 156.8 ± 25.7 | 154 ± 22.06 | 142.67 ± 18.77 | 2.19e | 0.12 |
| Hospitalization days, mean ± SD | 13.04 ± 4.95 | 11.70 ± 5.04 | 11.06 ± 4.54 | 0.95e | 0.39 |
| Time from onset to treatment, median (IQR), min | 370 (230.5, 820.5) | 154 (125.0, 238.0) | 272.5 (183.8, 386.3) | 20.80a | <0.01 |
Abbreviations: NRT: no reperfusion therapy; IVT: intravenous thrombolysis treatment; EVT: endovascular intervention; rLMCs: regional leptomeningeal score; NIHSS: National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; SD: standard deviation; IQR: interquartile range. aKruskal-Wallis test; bχ2 test; crank sum test; dFisher's exact probability method; eANOVA.
Multiple comparisons based on age and time from onset to treatment.
| Characteristics | NRT vs. IVT | NRT vs. EVT | IVT vs. EVT |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 0.073∗ | 0.065∗ | <0.001∗ |
| Time from onset to treatment, min | <0.001∗ | 0.279∗ | <0.001∗ |
∗ P value.
Efficacy and safety outcomes according to treatment methods.
| Characteristic | NRT | IVT | EVT | Unadjusted value (95% CI); | Adjusted value (95% CI)†: |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary efficacy outcome | |||||
| Delta NIHSS score, median (IQR) | -1 (-2.5 to 0) | -3 (-6 to 0) | -5 (-10.25 to -3.75) | -0.98 (-3.18 to 1.22); | -0.40 (-2.89 to 2.09); |
| 90-day mRS score, median (IQR) | 4 (1, 5) | 2 (1, 3) | 1 (1, 2) | -1.13 (-2.04 to -0.22); | -0.67 (-1.65 to 0.32); |
| Secondary efficacy outcomes | |||||
| 90-day mRS score 0-2 (%) | 11 (44.00) | 20 (74.07) | 16 (88.89) | 3.64 (1.13-11.69); | 2.23 (0.51-9.64); |
| FIV, median (IQR), ml | 50.93 (8.55, 112.75) | 30.77 (8.75, 55.270) | 26.08 (6.78, 53.63) | -43.28 (-72.97 to -13.59); | -8.63 (-37.67 to 20.41); |
| 90-day mortality rate (%) | 6 (24) | 2 (7.41) | 0 | NA | NA |
| mTICI ≥ 2b (%) | - | - | 16 (88.89) | NA | NA |
| Safety outcomes | |||||
| sICH (%) | 0 | 4 (14.81) | 0 | NA | NA |
| Procedure-related complications (%) | - | - | 1 (5.56) | NA | NA |
Abbreviations: NRT: no reperfusion therapy; IVT: intravenous thrombolysis treatment; EVT: endovascular intervention; NIHSS: National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; IQR: interquartile range; mRS: modified Rankin Scale; sICH: symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage; aICH: asymptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage; mTICI: modified thrombolysis in cerebral ischemia score; FIV: final infarct volume (within 2-7 days after symptom onset); NA: not applicable; delta NIHSS score: change in the NIHSS score from baseline to 24 h. †Model adjusted for age, admission NIHSS score, and time from onset to treatment. ∗A comparison was conducted between the NRT and IVT groups, and #comparison conducted between the NRT and EVT groups. ▲A comparison was conducted between the IVT and EVT groups.
Figure 1Distribution of mRS scores at 90 days in the three groups. Notes: proportion of mRS scores at 90 days in patients in the NRT, IVT, and EVT groups. NRT: no reperfusion therapy; IVT: intravenous thrombolysis treatment; EVT: endovascular intervention; mRS: modified Rankin Scale. A 90-day mRS score of 0-1 was defined as an excellent outcome, an mRS score of 0-2 was defined as a good outcome, an mRS score of 3-5 was defined as a bad outcome, and an mRS score of 6 referred to death.
Figure 2Comparison of NIHSS scores among the three groups. Notes: box and whisker plots comparing median NIHSS scores at admission and 24 hours after treatment in the no reperfusion therapy (NRT), intravenous thrombolysis treatment (IVT), and endovascular intervention (EVT) groups. The horizontal line in the middle of each box represents the median, and the upper and lower boundaries of the box represent the 75th percentile and 25th percentile, respectively. The whiskers above and below the box indicate the 90th and 10th percentiles, respectively.