Abstract WP2: Benefit Of Alteplase And Lacunar Stroke: A Post-hoc Analysis Of The Shine Trial

Abstract

Introduction: Small subcortical infarcts, synonymous in the literature with lacunar or small vessel disease infarcts, occur in roughly a quarter of all ischemic stroke. While the use of alteplase and other thrombolytics is well known to improve outcomes for acute ischemic stroke, the role of thrombolytics in the acute management of this infarct subtype is not entirely proven. We hypothesized that the use of alteplase in the hyperacute management of small vessel infarcts improved long-term outcomes. Methods: We performed a post-hoc analysis of the Stroke Hyperglycemia Insulin Network Effort (SHINE) dataset. We included only those with an etiologic diagnosis of lacunar stroke. The primary exposure was guideline-based administration of alteplase. The primary outcome was 90-day functional outcome by mRS 0 - 2 (good) versus 3 - 6 (poor). Insulin treatment arms were combined as no differential treatment effect was demonstrated in the original SHINE publication. Standard descriptive and logistic regression analysis, adjusted for age, arrival blood glucose, and NIH Stroke Scale, were used for data interpretation. Results: We included 258 SHINE participants who were diagnosed with a lacunar infarct: mean age 65 ± 13 years, 53% (138/258) were men, and 57.7% (150/258) received alteplase. Demographic data including age, sex, and presenting variables including NIH Stroke Scale score, systolic blood pressure, and blood glucose levels did not differ between those who received alteplase and those who did not. Those who received alteplase were more likely to be within the good outcome group (OR 1.89, 95%CI 1.03 - 3.47, p = 0.039). Conclusion: The administration of intravenous alteplase for reported lacunar stroke increased the likelihood of a good outcome by nearly 2-fold. Lacunar infarcts, a radiographic outcome of small subcortical infarcts, are unique in pathogenesis compared to cardioembolic and large-artery atheromatous disease. Despite these differences, our findings support the use of acute thrombolytic therapy within this patient population. Future studies are needed to assess the response between small subcortical infarcts subtypes (e.g. branch atheromatous disease, subcortical microembolism, lipohyalinosis) and acute reperfusion therapy.