Kim, Joon‐Tae

Background The contact aspiration (CA) technique is often used to perform endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS); however, rescue strategies are necessary if CA fails to achieve recanalization. This study investigates the outcomes of incorporating stent retriever (SR) thrombectomy in the rescue strategy following failed CA. Methods EVT patients with failed CA attempts were identified from a large multicenter registry and stratified by rescue technique: CA alone or incorporating SR in the rescue strategy. Outcomes included successful recanalization, 90-day functional outcomes (defined by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and 90-day mortality. Results Among 1885 patients with failed CA attempts, conversion to SR was associated with higher recanalization rates (85.2% vs 80.6%; p=0.03), higher rates of second-pass recanalization (31.2% vs 23.4%; p<0.001), and better 90-day outcomes (mRS 0–2: 35.2% vs 29.9%; p=0.04) when compared with repeated CA attempts. Trevo SRs showed higher odds of successful recanalization (adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=1.9; p=0.02), second-pass recanalization (aOR=1.7; p=0.01), and reduced odds of sICH (aOR=0.3; p=0.02). EmboTrap SRs were associated with higher odds of 90-day mortality (aOR=2.6; p=0.004) and sICH (aOR=2.9; p=0.04) and lower odds of recanalization (aOR=0.5; p=0.03). Conclusions Incorporating SR in the rescue strategy after a failed CA improves recanalization rates and functional outcomes. Trevo SRs demonstrated superior efficacy and safety when incorporated into the rescue strategy.

Background A higher number of recanalization attempts reduces the efficacy of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke secondary to large vessel occlusion (LVO). We assessed the impact of switching EVT techniques after a failed first pass on procedural and clinical outcomes. Methods This multicenter international study, conducted between January 2013 and December 2022, included patients undergoing EVT for anterior circulation LVO (internal carotid artery or M1 segments) with failed first pass recanalization. Propensity score matching identified a 1:1 matched cohort of patients in whom EVT technique was changed after a failed first pass and those with the same technique repeated. The primary outcome was successful recanalization at second attempt defined as Thrombolysis in Cerebral Ischemia (TICI) score of 2B or higher. Secondary outcomes were 90-day modified Rankin Score (mRS) and postprocedural hemorrhage. Results Among 2167 patients, converting to an alternative technique after a failed first pass was associated with higher odds of successful recanalization (adjusted OR (aOR)=1.5, p=0.041), and higher odds of mRS 0–2 at 90 days (aOR=1.6, p=0.005) without additional risk of symptomatic hemorrhage (p=0.379). Using a propensity score matched cohort of 490 patients, technique conversion at second attempt increased odds of successful recanalization at second attempt (aOR=1.32, p=0.006) and 90-day mRS 0–2 (aOR=1.38, p=0.008). Conclusions Early conversion to an alternative EVT technique after a failed first pass recanalization in patients with AIS is associated with better technical success and clinical outcomes.

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.

Background Multiple randomized trials could not establish the noninferiority of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) alone without preceding intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) or superiority of IVT followed by EVT in anterior circulation large‐vessel occlusion stroke. The role of prior IVT in posterior circulation large‐vessel occlusion remains controversial. Methods In this multicenter, retrospective study, patients with stroke with large‐vessel occlusion in the posterior circulation who received EVT alone or with IVT were selected from the stroke thrombectomy and aneurysm registry between 2013 and 2022. Effects of IVT followed by thrombectomy on favorable functional outcome (defined as modified Rankin scale≤3 at 90 days) and safety were investigated using multivariable logistic and linear regression models. Results Of the 588 included patients, 67% (n = 394) were treated with EVT alone and 29% (n = 170) with EVT after IVT, and 4% (n = 24) have missing values on this variable. Controlling for multiple confounding factors, IVT was not associated with a higher likelihood of favorable functional outcome at 90 days (odds ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.52–2.09; P = 0.901). Thrombectomy alone did not show any safety advantages compared with those receiving IVT. Conclusion Similar functional outcomes and complication rates were seen in patients with posterior circulation large‐vessel occlusion treated with EVT alone versus EVT after IVT. Further prospective studies are required to determine the utility of IVT in posterior circulation stroke, especially in patients being directly admitted to thrombectomy centers.