Jingyu Zhang1, Baixue Jia1, Yuesong Pan2, Zequan Yu1, Yiming Deng1, Dapeng Mo1, Ning Ma1, Feng Gao1, Zhongrong Miao3. 1. Department of Interventional Neuroradiology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, No.119 South Fourth Ring West Road, Fengtai District, Beijing, 100070, China. 2. China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Diseases, Beijing, China. 3. Department of Interventional Neuroradiology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, No.119 South Fourth Ring West Road, Fengtai District, Beijing, 100070, China. zhongrongm@163.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of our study is to compare the characteristics and clinical outcomes among the different endovascular treatment (EVT) strategies for large vessel occlusion underlying intracranial atherosclerosis (ICAS-LVO) in a recent nationwide registry. METHODS: Patients with isolated ICAS-LVO were enrolled in our analysis and were categorized into three groups: first-line mechanical thrombectomy (MT) with rescue angioplasty and/or stenting (MT + RS), direct angioplasty and/or stenting without thrombectomy (DA), and MT alone. Baseline and periprocedural characteristics, successful recanalization, and 90-day functional outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Of 396 patients with isolated ICAS-LVO in our study, successful recanalization was achieved in 94.5%, 100%, and 90.9% of patients in the MT + RS, DA, and MT groups, respectively. The 90-day functional independence in the three groups was 50.8%, 59.0%, and 45.1%. The main efficacy and safety outcomes showed no significant differences among the groups. First-pass recanalization (FPR) was more observed in the MT group (43.4%), the recanalization rate per attempt in the MT group gradually decreased until the fourth attempt, and further maneuvers showed recanalization rates of ≈0% per attempt. MT + RS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.10, p < 0.0001) and DA (aOR 0.18, p = 0.0013) were associated with lower FPR rate than MT alone in the multivariable logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: The technical feasibility and favorable outcomes of several EVT strategies for ICAS-LVO were established in our study. First-line MT with a bailout angioplasty is a reasonable option for ICAS-LVO, and DA is an effective option for the cases when ICAS-LVO is strongly suspected before EVT procedure.
PURPOSE: The aim of our study is to compare the characteristics and clinical outcomes among the different endovascular treatment (EVT) strategies for large vessel occlusion underlying intracranial atherosclerosis (ICAS-LVO) in a recent nationwide registry. METHODS: Patients with isolated ICAS-LVO were enrolled in our analysis and were categorized into three groups: first-line mechanical thrombectomy (MT) with rescue angioplasty and/or stenting (MT + RS), direct angioplasty and/or stenting without thrombectomy (DA), and MT alone. Baseline and periprocedural characteristics, successful recanalization, and 90-day functional outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Of 396 patients with isolated ICAS-LVO in our study, successful recanalization was achieved in 94.5%, 100%, and 90.9% of patients in the MT + RS, DA, and MT groups, respectively. The 90-day functional independence in the three groups was 50.8%, 59.0%, and 45.1%. The main efficacy and safety outcomes showed no significant differences among the groups. First-pass recanalization (FPR) was more observed in the MT group (43.4%), the recanalization rate per attempt in the MT group gradually decreased until the fourth attempt, and further maneuvers showed recanalization rates of ≈0% per attempt. MT + RS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.10, p < 0.0001) and DA (aOR 0.18, p = 0.0013) were associated with lower FPR rate than MT alone in the multivariable logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: The technical feasibility and favorable outcomes of several EVT strategies for ICAS-LVO were established in our study. First-line MT with a bailout angioplasty is a reasonable option for ICAS-LVO, and DA is an effective option for the cases when ICAS-LVO is strongly suspected before EVT procedure.
Authors: Anderson Chun On Tsang; Emanuele Orru; Jesse M Klostranec; I-Hsiao Yang; Kui Kai Lau; Frederick Chun Pong Tsang; Wai Man Lui; Vitor Mendes Pereira; Timo Krings Journal: Stroke Date: 2019-05-14 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: William J Powers; Alejandro A Rabinstein; Teri Ackerson; Opeolu M Adeoye; Nicholas C Bambakidis; Kyra Becker; José Biller; Michael Brown; Bart M Demaerschalk; Brian Hoh; Edward C Jauch; Chelsea S Kidwell; Thabele M Leslie-Mazwi; Bruce Ovbiagele; Phillip A Scott; Kevin N Sheth; Andrew M Southerland; Deborah V Summers; David L Tirschwell Journal: Stroke Date: 2019-10-30 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Robert C Rennert; Arvin R Wali; Jeffrey A Steinberg; David R Santiago-Dieppa; Scott E Olson; J Scott Pannell; Alexander A Khalessi Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Sami Al Kasab; Eyad Almallouhi; Ali Alawieh; Stacey Wolfe; Kyle M Fargen; Adam S Arthur; Nitin Goyal; Travis Dumont; Peter Kan; Joon-Tae Kim; Reade De Leacy; Ilko Maier; Joshua Osbun; Ansaar Rai; Pascal Jabbour; Jonathan A Grossberg; Min S Park; Robert M Starke; Roberto Crosa; Alejandro M Spiotta Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2021-06-05 Impact factor: 5.501