Mulpur, Bhageeradh

Background A combination of intravenous (IVT) or intra-arterial (IAT) thrombolysis with mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion (AIS-LVO) has been investigated. However, there is limited data on patients who receive both IVT and IAT compared with IVT alone before MT. Methods STAR data from 2013 to 2023 was utilized. We performed propensity score matching between the two groups. The primary outcomes were symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 0–2. Secondary outcomes included successful recanalization (modified treatment in cerebral infarction (mTICI) ≥2B, ≥2C), early neurological improvement, any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and 90-day mortality. Results A total of 2454 AIS-LVO patients were included. Propensity matching yielded 190 well-matched patients in each group. No significant differences were observed between the groups in either ICH or sICH (odds ratio (OR): 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51–1.24, P=0.37; OR: 0.60, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.24, P=0.21, respectively). Rates of successful recanalization and early neurological improvement (ENI) were significantly lower in MT+IVT + IAT. mRS 0–1 and mortality were not significantly different between the two groups. However, the MT+IVT + IAT group demonstrated superior rates of good functional outcomes (90-day mRS 0–1) compared with patients in the MT+IVT group who had mTICI ≤2B, (OR: 2.18, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.99, P=0.04). Conclusion The combined use of IAT and IVT thrombolysis in AIS-LVO patients undergoing MT is safe. Although the MT+IVT+ IAT group demonstrated lower rates of recanalization and early neurological improvement, long-term functional outcomes were favorable in this group suggesting a potential delayed benefit of IAT.

Introduction: The combination of intravenous or intra-arterial thrombolysis with mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) has been thoroughly investigated. However, no study has explored the outcomes of combining both intravenous and intra-arterial thrombolysis with MT. Methods: Data from Stroke Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry (STAR) from 2013 to 2023 was utilized. We compared AIS patients with LVO who underwent MT with combined intra-venous and intra-arterial thrombolysis (IV+IA) and with intra-venous thrombolysis alone (IV). We performed propensity score (PS) matching between the two groups using age, sex, premorbid mRS, admission NIHSS, occluded vessel, ASPECTS score, time from symptoms onset to arterial puncture, and frontline technique. Primary outcomes were any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) and symptomatic ICH (sICH). Secondary outcomes included successful recanalization (mTICI ≥2C), early neurological improvement (defined as 4 or more points improvement in NIHSS score in 24 hours), 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-2, mRS 0-1, and mortality. Results: A total of 2495 LVO-related AIS patients were included, consisting of the IA+IV group (n = 266) and the IV group (n = 2228). Propensity matching yielded 192 well-matched patients in each group. No significant differences were observed between the groups in either ICH or sICH (odds ratio [OR]: 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61-1.52, p = 0.60; OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.42-2.03, p > 0.90, respectively). The IA+IV group had a significantly lower proportion of successful recanalization (OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.27-0.62, p < 0.001), and early neurological improvement (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.30-1.00). However, 90-day mRS 0-2, mRS 0-1, and mortality rates showed no significant differences between the two groups. Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that the combined use of IA and IV thrombolysis in AIS patients undergoing MT is safe. Although the IA+IV group demonstrated lower rates of recanalization and early neurological improvement, long-term functional outcomes and mortality rates were comparable to the IV-thrombolysis group, indicating a potential delayed benefit of additional IA thrombolysis therapy.