Isidor, Julio

Background Randomized trials have shown equivocal outcomes between a direct aspiration as first-pass technique (ADAPT) and stent retriever (SR) stroke thrombectomy, yet whether specific patient subgroups benefit differentially from one technique over the other remains unknown. Methods In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, patients with large vessel occlusion were included, and those who underwent ADAPT versus SR first-pass thrombectomy (either as standalone or combined with aspiration) were compared. The primary outcome was a composite of first-pass effect (FPE, modified Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) 2c or better with one attempt) with no symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). A causal forest model was used to estimate the conditional average treatment effect (CATE) for each patient, with larger CATEs indicating that ADAPT is expected to be more advantageous. Patients were stratified by CATEs, and outcomes were compared between treatment groups. Results Among 6700 included patients, ADAPT (n=3695, 55%) was associated with a higher rate of FPE with no sICH (39.9% vs 26.9%; adjusted OR (aOR) 2.07, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.41, P<0.001). The causal forest identified significant treatment effect heterogeneity (interaction P<0.001), where ADAPT was more advantageous in more recent years and among patients with M1 occlusions presenting in earlier time windows. Low-CATE patients showed no statistically significant difference between techniques (aOR 0.91, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.45, P=0.70), while medium- and high-CATE patients demonstrated progressively larger ADAPT advantages (aOR 2.06, 95% CI 1.67 to 2.55, and aOR 2.99, 95% CI 2.24 to 3.98, respectively, both P<0.001). Conclusions ADAPT may be superior to SR for a majority of patients, particularly in recent years, and among patients with M1 occlusions presenting in earlier time windows.

Background The benefit of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) is well established. We aim to study the benefits of IVT in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) who underwent unsuccessful mechanical thrombectomy (MT). Methods We included AIS patients who underwent MT for anterior circulation LVO with failed recanalization (modified treatment in cerebral ischemia [mTICI] score ≤ 2A). Patients who received IVT prior to MT were compared to those who received MT alone. Propensity score matching using demographic, clinical, radiographic and procedural variables was used to match patients with and without IVT. The primary outcome was favorable 90-day good functional outcome (defined as modified Rankin scale of 0–2), and secondary outcomes included intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH (sICH), and 90-day mortality. Results Totally, 610 AIS patients with unsuccessful MT were included. After propensity matching, 219 patients were identified in each group. Median age was 70 years and 73 years in the IVT + MT and MT alone groups, respectively. In the IVT + MT group, final mTICI scores of 0, 1, and 2A were achieved in 92 (42.0%), 33 (15.1%), and 94 (42.9%) patients, respectively, versus 76 (34.7%), 29 (13.2%), and 114 (52.1%) in the MT alone group. The IVT + MT group had greater odds of 90-day good functional outcome (adjusted odds ratio 2.54, 95% confidence interval 1.53–4.32). There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes. Conclusions IVT is associated with improved functional outcomes in AIS patients with LVO despite unsuccessful MT.

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.