Non-contrast head CT alone for thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke: analysis of the ANGEL-ACT registry
TL;DR: In this article, a comparative outcome study of patients with acute ischemic stroke undergoing MT with non-contrast head computed tomography (NCHCT) alone versus patients undergoing NCHCT plus non-invasive vessel imaging (NVI) was conducted from the ANGEL-ACT registry.
Abstract: Backgroud The goal of this study was to determine if the choice of imaging paradigm performed in the emergency department influences the procedural or clinical outcomes after mechanical thrombectomy (MT). Methods This is a retrospective comparative outcome study which was conducted from the ANGEL-ACT registry. Comparisons were made between baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with acute ischemic stroke undergoing MT with non-contrast head computed tomography (NCHCT) alone versus patients undergoing NCHCT plus non-invasive vessel imaging (NVI) (including CT angiography (with or without CT perfusion) and magnetic resonance angiography). The primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included change in mRS score from baseline to 90 days, the proportions of mRS 0–1, 0–2, and 0–3, and dramatic clinical improvement at 24 hours. The safety outcomes were any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH, and mortality within 90 days. Results A total of 894 patients met the inclusion criteria; 476 (53%) underwent NCHCT alone and 418 (47%) underwent NCHCT + NVI. In the NCHCT alone group, the door-to-reperfusion time was shorter by 47 min compared with the NCHCT + NVI group (219 vs 266 min, P Conclusions In patients selected for MT using NCHCT alone versus NCHCT + NVI, there were improved procedural outcomes and smaller increases in baseline mRS scores at 90 days.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the authors compared the visibility of intracranial aneurysm wall and thickness quantification between 7 and 3-T vessel wall imaging and evaluated the association between aneurysis size and wall thickness.
Abstract: OBJECTIVES To compare the visibility of intracranial aneurysm wall and thickness quantification between 7 and 3 T vessel wall imaging and evaluate the association between aneurysm size and wall thickness. METHODS Twenty-nine patients with 29 unruptured intracranial aneurysms were prospectively recruited for 3D T1-weighted vessel wall MRI at both 3 T and 7 T with 0.53 mm (3 T) and 0.4 mm (7 T) isotropic resolution, respectively. Two neuroradiologists independently evaluated wall visibility (0-5 Likert scale), quantified the apparent wall thickness (AWT) using a semi-automated full-width-half-maximum method, calculated wall sharpness, and measured the wall-to-lumen contrast ratio (CRwall/lumen). RESULTS Twenty-four patients with 24 aneurysms were included in this study. 7 T achieved significantly better aneurysm wall visibility than 3 T (3.6 ± 1.1 vs 2.7 ± 0.8, p = 0.003). AWT measured on 3 T and 7 T had a good correlation (averaged r = 0.63 ± 0.19). However, AWT on 3 T was 15% thicker than that on 7 T (0.52 ± 0.07 mm vs 0.45 ± 0.05 mm, p < 0.001). Wall sharpness on 7 T was 57% higher than that on 3 T (1.95 ± 0.32 mm-1 vs 1.24 ± 0.15 mm-1, p < 0.001). CRwall/lumen on 3 T and 7 T was comparable (p = 0.424). AWT on 7 T was positively correlated with aneurysm size (saccular: r = 0.58, q = 0.046; fusiform: r = 0.67, q = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS 7 T provides better visualization of intracranial aneurysm wall with higher sharpness than 3 T. 3 T overestimates the wall thickness relative to 7 T. Aneurysm wall thickness is positively correlated with aneurysm size. 7 T MRI is a promising tool to evaluate aneurysm wall in vivo. KEY POINTS • 7 T provides better visualization of intracranial aneurysm wall with higher sharpness than 3 T. • 3 T overestimates the wall thickness comparing with 7 T. • Aneurysm wall thickness is positively correlated with aneurysm size.
5 citations
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors investigated the longitudinal change and prognostic role of ITIH4 in acute ischemic stroke patients, and they found that it was negatively associated with tumor necrosis factor-alpha (r = −0.151) or D1 (P = 0.013), was decreased in deaths than survivors, and its reduction is correlated with higher inflammation, increased risk of recurrence and mortality.
Abstract: Inter-α-trypsin inhibitor heavy chain H4 (ITIH4) modulates atherosclerosis, lipid, and inflammation, which is involved in the development of acute ischemic stroke. Hence, this study aimed to investigate the longitudinal change and prognostic role of ITIH4 in acute ischemic stroke. In 267 patients with acute ischemic stroke, serum ITIH4 after admission (baseline), the 1st day after admission (D1), D3, D7, and D30, and inflammatory cytokines at baseline were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Additionally, serum ITIH4 of 30 controls after enrollment was detected by ELISA. ITIH4 was reduced in acute ischemic stroke patients than controls [median (interquartile range, IQR): 131.0 (95.5-194.3) vs. 418.6 (241.5-506.8) ng/mL] (P < 0.001). Among acute ischemic stroke patients, ITIH4 was negatively associated with tumor necrosis factor-alpha (r = −0.211, P = 0.001), interleukin (IL)-1β (r = −0.164, P = 0.007), IL-6 (r = −0.121, P = 0.049), and IL-17A (r = −0.188, P = 0.002). ITIH4 presented a decreased trend from admission to D3, then increased from D3 to D30 (P < 0.001). The 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year cumulative recurrence rate was 7.5%, 18.0%, and 19.1%, respectively; meanwhile, 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year cumulative death rate was 2.2%, 7.1%, and 7.1%, accordingly. The further analysis presented that ITIH4 at baseline (P = 0.002), D1 (P = 0.049), D3 (P = 0.003), D7 (P < 0.001), and D30 (P < 0.001) was decreased in recurrent patients than non-recurrent patients; besides, ITIH4 at D3 (P = 0.017), D7 (P = 0.004), and D30 (P = 0.002), but not at baseline (P = 0.151) or D1 (P = 0.013), was decreased in deaths than survivors. Serum ITIH4 declines at first and then elevates with time, and its reduction is correlated with higher inflammation, increased risk of recurrence and mortality in acute ischemic stroke patients.
References
More filters
University of Calgary1, Maastricht University2, Erasmus University Rotterdam3, Royal Melbourne Hospital4, University of Amsterdam5, Bellvitge University Hospital6, Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health7, UCLA Medical Center8, University Hospital Bonn9, State University of New York System10, University of Toronto11, Beaumont Hospital12, Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine13, Altair Engineering14, University of California, Los Angeles15, University of Pittsburgh16
TL;DR: Endovascular thrombectomy is of benefit to most patients with acute ischaemic stroke caused by occlusion of the proximal anterior circulation, irrespective of patient characteristics or geographical location, and will have global implications on structuring systems of care to provide timely treatment.
4,846 citations
TL;DR: These guidelines detail prehospital care, urgent and emergency evaluation and treatment with intravenous and intra-arterial therapies, and in-hospital management, including secondary prevention measures that are appropriately instituted within the first 2 weeks.
Abstract: Background and Purpose- The purpose of these guidelines is to provide an up-to-date comprehensive set of recommendations in a single document for clinicians caring for adult patients with acute arterial ischemic stroke. The intended audiences are prehospital care providers, physicians, allied health professionals, and hospital administrators. These guidelines supersede the 2013 Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS) Guidelines and are an update of the 2018 AIS Guidelines. Methods- Members of the writing group were appointed by the American Heart Association (AHA) Stroke Council's Scientific Statements Oversight Committee, representing various areas of medical expertise. Members were not allowed to participate in discussions or to vote on topics relevant to their relations with industry. An update of the 2013 AIS Guidelines was originally published in January 2018. This guideline was approved by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee and the AHA Executive Committee. In April 2018, a revision to these guidelines, deleting some recommendations, was published online by the AHA. The writing group was asked review the original document and revise if appropriate. In June 2018, the writing group submitted a document with minor changes and with inclusion of important newly published randomized controlled trials with >100 participants and clinical outcomes at least 90 days after AIS. The document was sent to 14 peer reviewers. The writing group evaluated the peer reviewers' comments and revised when appropriate. The current final document was approved by all members of the writing group except when relationships with industry precluded members from voting and by the governing bodies of the AHA. These guidelines use the American College of Cardiology/AHA 2015 Class of Recommendations and Level of Evidence and the new AHA guidelines format. Results- These guidelines detail prehospital care, urgent and emergency evaluation and treatment with intravenous and intra-arterial therapies, and in-hospital management, including secondary prevention measures that are appropriately instituted within the first 2 weeks. The guidelines support the overarching concept of stroke systems of care in both the prehospital and hospital settings. Conclusions- These guidelines provide general recommendations based on the currently available evidence to guide clinicians caring for adult patients with acute arterial ischemic stroke. In many instances, however, only limited data exist demonstrating the urgent need for continued research on treatment of acute ischemic stroke.
3,819 citations
TL;DR: This CT score is simple and reliable and identifies stroke patients unlikely to make an independent recovery despite thrombolytic treatment as well as primary outcomes, including symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage and 3-month functional outcome.
2,044 citations
Medical College of Wisconsin1, Harvard University2, University of Cincinnati3, Dresden University of Technology4, University of California, Los Angeles5, Stanford University6, Northwestern University7, Mayo Clinic8, Vanderbilt University9, University of Edinburgh10, Oregon State University11, University of Pittsburgh12, Cardiovascular Institute of the South13, University at Buffalo14, University of Virginia15, Stony Brook University16, University of Toronto17, Heidelberg University18, Washington University in St. Louis19, Case Western Reserve University20, Emory University21, University of Miami22, University of Calgary23
TL;DR: A multidisciplinary panel of neurointerventionalists, neuroradiologists, and stroke neurologists with extensive experience in neuroimaging and IAT, convened at the “Consensus Meeting on Revascularization Grading Following Endovascular Therapy” with the goal of addressing heterogeneity in cerebral angiographic revascularization grading.
Abstract: See related article, p 2509
Intra-arterial therapy (IAT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) has dramatically evolved during the past decade to include aspiration and stent-retriever devices. Recent randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the superior revascularization efficacy of stent-retrievers compared with the first-generation Merci device.1,2 Additionally, the Diffusion and Perfusion Imaging Evaluation for Understanding Stroke Evolution (DEFUSE) 2, the Mechanical Retrieval and Recanalization of Stroke Clots Using Embolectomy (MR RESCUE), and the Interventional Management of Stroke (IMS) III trials have confirmed the importance of early revascularization for achieving better clinical outcome.3–5 Despite these data, the current heterogeneity in cerebral angiographic revascularization grading (CARG) poses a major obstacle to further advances in stroke therapy. To date, several CARG scales have been used to measure the success of IAT.6–14 Even when the same scale is used in different studies, it is applied using varying operational criteria, which further confounds the interpretation of this key metric.10 The lack of a uniform grading approach limits comparison of revascularization rates across clinical trials and hinders the translation of promising, early phase angiographic results into proven, clinically effective treatments.6–14 For these reasons, it is critical that CARG scales be standardized and end points for successful revascularization be refined.6 This will lead to a greater understanding of the aspects of revascularization that are strongly predictive of clinical response.
The optimal grading scale must demonstrate (1) a strong correlation with clinical outcome, (2) simplicity and feasibility of scale interpretation while ensuring characterization of relevant angiographic findings, and (3) high inter-rater reproducibility.
To address these issues, a multidisciplinary panel of neurointerventionalists, neuroradiologists, and stroke neurologists with extensive experience in neuroimaging and IAT, convened at the “Consensus Meeting on Revascularization Grading Following Endovascular Therapy” with the goal …
1,162 citations
TL;DR: Mixed radiological–clinical classification adds clinical symptoms to the presence of radiological hemorrhage to classify intracranial hemorrhages as symptomatic or asymptomatic as well as pure radiological classification.
Abstract: Intracranial hemorrhage is an important safety end point in clinical trials.1–6 Yet, not each intracranial hemorrhage detected by computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) worsens neurological symptoms and impairs outcomes. Consequently, intracranial hemorrhages after ischemic stroke and reperfusion therapy are classified by both imaging characteristics and the association with clinical worsening. Pure radiological classification uses the location, form, and extent of hemorrhage and its relation to ischemic injury to distinguish among hemorrhage subtypes that may differ in impairment of neurological function and prognosis. Mixed radiological–clinical classification adds clinical symptoms to the presence of radiological hemorrhage to classify intracranial hemorrhages as symptomatic or asymptomatic.
Historically, modern approaches to classifying hemorrhage after reperfusion therapy began with the emphasis of Pessin et al1 on the radiographic distinction between hemorrhagic infarction (HI) and parenchymatous hematoma (PH) after embolic stroke. They stated that HI refers to the pathological condition in which petechial or more confluent hemorrhages occupy a portion of an area of ischemic infarction. PH in an area of infarction; in contrast, is a solid clot of blood with mass effect, which displaces and destroys brain tissue.1 They later proposed that HI (in contrast to PH) could be more of a CT curiosity than a dreaded complication.2 Wolpert et al5 defined HI as areas of barely visible increased density with indistinct margins within an infarct or areas of increased density with indistinct margins and a speckled or mottled appearance or multiple areas of coalescent hemorrhage. A mass effect could be present because of the either edema or hemorrhagic component and PH (later named parenchymal hematoma3) and as very dense, homogenous region(s) of circumscribed increased density usually with mass effect. Both HI and PH are presumably caused by the same postischemic pathophysiology, bleeding from damaged …
643 citations