1.CT- versus MRI-Based Imaging for Thrombolysis and Mechanical Thrombectomy in Ischemic Stroke: Analysis from the Austrian Stroke Registry
Stefan KREBS ; Alexandra POSEKANY ; Alina PILZ ; Julia FERRARI ; Alexandra BERNEGGER ; Christian NEUMANN ; Siegfried THURNHER ; Dominik ROTH ; Wilfried LANG ; Marek SYKORA ;
Journal of Stroke 2022;24(3):383-389
Background:
and Purpose It is unclear whether a particular stroke imaging modality offers an advantage for the acute stroke treatment. The aim of this study was to compare procedure times, efficacy and safety of thrombolysis and/or thrombectomy based on computed tomography (CT) versus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) acute stroke imaging.
Methods:
Data of stroke patients who received intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and/or mechanical thrombectomy (MT) were extracted from a nationwide, prospective stroke unit registry and categorized according to initial imaging modality. Study endpoints included procedure times, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), early neurological improvement, 3-month functional outcome by modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and mortality.
Results:
Stroke patients (n=16,799) treated with IVT and 2,248 treated with MT were included. MRI-guided patients (n=2,599) were younger, had less comorbidities and higher rates of strokes with unknown onset as compared to CT-guided patients. In patients treated with IVT, no differences were observed regarding the rates of functional outcome by mRS 0–1 (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.05), sICH (adjusted OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.08), and mortality (adjusted OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.22). Patients undergoing MT selected by MRI as compared to CT showed equal rates of functional outcome by mRS 0–2 (adjusted OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.16), sICH (adjusted OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.69), and mortality (adjusted OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.09). MRI-guided patients showed a significant intrahospital delay of about 20 minutes in both the IVT and the MT group.
Conclusions
This large non-randomized comparison study indicates that CT- and MRI-guided patient selection for IVT/MT may perform equally well in terms of functional outcome and safety.
2.Mechanical Thrombectomy in Acute Stroke Patients with Moderate to Severe Pre-Stroke Disability
Marek SYKORA ; Patrik MICHEL ; Davide STRAMBO ; Stefan KREBS ; Julia FERRARI ; Alexandra POSEKANY ; Dominika MIKŠOVÁ ; Konstantin HERMANN ; Thomas GATTRINGER ; Elke GIZEWSKI ; Hannes DEUTSCHMANN ; Christian NEUMANN ; Wilfried LANG
Journal of Stroke 2022;24(3):396-403
and Purpose Studies on mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients with preexisting disability are limited. We aimed to compare the outcomes of MT versus best medical treatment (BMT) in these patients. Methods In the nationwide Austrian registry and Swiss monocentric registry, we identified 462 AIS patients with pre-stroke disability (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score ≥3) and acute large vessel occlusion. The primary outcome was returning to pre-stroke mRS or better at 3 months. Secondary outcomes were early neurological improvement (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score improvement ≥8 at 24 to 48 hours), 3-month mortality, and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH). Multivariable regression models and propensity score matching (PSM) were used for statistical analyses. Results Compared with the BMT group (n=175), the MT group (n=175) had younger age, more severe strokes, and lower pre-stroke mRS, but similar proportion of receiving intravenous thrombolysis. MT was associated with higher odds of returning to baseline mRS or better at 3 months (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39 to 4.47), early neurological improvement (aOR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.41 to 4.88), and lower risk of 3-month mortality (aOR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.49). PSM analysis showed similar findings. MT was not associated with an increased risk of sICH (4.0% vs. 2.1% in all patients; 4.2% vs. 2.4% in the PSM cohort). Conclusions MT in patients with pre-stroke mRS ≥3 might improve the 3-month outcomes and short-term neurological impairment, suggesting that pre-stroke disability alone should not be a reason to withhold MT, but that individual case-by-case decisions may be more appropriate.