Mechanical Thrombectomy in Patients with a Large Ischemic Volume at Presentation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- Author:
Basile KERLEROUX
1
;
Kevin JANOT
;
Jean François HAK
;
Johannes KAESMACHER
;
Wagih Ben HASSEN
;
Joseph BENZAKOUN
;
Catherine OPPENHEIM
;
Denis HERBRETEAU
;
Heloise IFERGAN
;
Nicolas BRICOUT
;
Hilde HENON
;
Takeshi YOSHIMOTO
;
Manabu INOUE
;
Arturo CONSOLI
;
Vincent COSTALAT
;
Olivier NAGGARA
;
Bertrand LAPERGUE
;
Federico CAGNAZZO
;
Grégoire BOULOUIS
Author Information
- Publication Type:Review
- From:Journal of Stroke 2021;23(3):358-366
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: The benefits of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and a large ischemic core (LIC) at presentation are uncertain. We aimed to obtain up-to-date aggregate estimates of the outcomes following MT in patients with volumetrically assessed LIC. We conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-conformed, PROSPERO-registered, systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that included patients with AIS and a baseline LIC treated with MT, reported ischemic core volume quantitatively, and included patients with a LIC defined as a core volume ≥50 mL. The search was restricted to studies published between January 2015 and June 2020. Random-effects-meta-analysis was used to assess the effect of MT on 90-day unfavorable outcome (i.e., modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 3–6), mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) occurrence. Sensitivity analyses were performed for imaging-modality (computed tomography-perfusion or magnetic resonance-diffusion weighted imaging) and LIC-definition (≥50 or ≥70 mL). We analyzed 10 studies (954 patients), including six (682 patients) with a control group, allowing to compare 332 patients with MT to 350 who received best-medical-management alone. Overall, after MT the rate of patients with mRS 3–6 at 90 days was 74% (99% confidence interval [CI], 67 to 84; Z-value=7.04; I2=92.3%) and the rate of 90-day mortality was 36% (99% CI, 33 to 40; Z-value=–7.07; I2=74.5). Receiving MT was associated with a significant decrease in mRS 3–6 odds ratio (OR) 0.19 (99% CI, 0.11 to 0.33; P<0.01; Z-value=–5.92; I2=62.56) and in mortality OR 0.60 (99% CI, 0.34 to 1.06; P=0.02; Z-value=–2.30; I2=58.72). Treatment group did not influence the proportion of patients experiencing sICH, OR 0.96 (99% CI, 0.2 to 1.49; P=0.54; Z-value=–0.63; I2=64.74). Neither imaging modality for core assessment, nor LIC definition influenced the aggregated outcomes. Using aggregate estimates, MT appeared to decrease the risk of unfavorable functional outcome in patients with a LIC assessed volumetrically at baseline.
