Endovascular therapy versus medical management for acute ischemic stroke with large infarct core: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract

ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of endovascular therapy (EVT) versus best medical management (BMM) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) with large infarct core. MethodsWe searched Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for published randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from inception to February 18, 2023. We defined patients with large core infarcts as having an Alberta Stroke Program early computed tomography score (ASPECTS) of 3–5. The primary outcome was functional independence, defined as a score of 0–2 on the modified Rankin scale (mRS) at 90 days. Secondary outcome was independent ambulation defined as mRS 0–3 at 90 days. Safety outcomes were mortality at 90 days, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). ResultsThe overall treatment effect was more favourable to EVT group. EVT was significantly correlated with improvement of functional independence at 90 days (mRS 0–2) (RR = 2.40; 95 % CI, 1.82–3.16; P < 0.01; I2 = 0 %) and independent ambulation (mRS 0–3) (RR = 1,78; 95 % CI, 1.28–2.48; P < 0.01; I2 = 58 %) at 90 days. 90-day mortality was not significantly different between the two groups(RR = 0.95; 95 % CI, 0.78–1.16; P > 0.05; I2 = 0 %). The risk of sICH and any ICH was higher in EVT group than in BMM group. ConclusionCompared with BMM, EVT may improve functional outcomes in patients with ASPECTS 3–5, despite being associated with an increased risk of sICH and any ICH.