Relative Improvement in Language vs Motor Functions with Reperfusion Therapies for Acute Stroke due to Large Vessel Occlusion.

Abstract

When weighing potential risks versus benefits of reperfusion therapy, the functions likely to recover if blood flow can be restored should be considered. Because deep and motor areas of the brain often infarct relatively early in acute stroke, we hypothesized that reperfusion therapies are more likely to improve language function and neglect (cortical functions) more than motor function. In this retrospective review of a prospectively collected database, patients with acute stroke due to large vessel occlusion), we evaluated percent improvement (mean change in score/maximum score) for different items of the National Institutes of Health Score Scale with and without endovascular thrombectomy, and/or intravenous thrombolysis. In total, 290 patients (mean age 61.8; SD 14.0; 47.9% female) met the inclusion criteria. For all outcome measures (percent change in language, total language, motor, and neglect) there were significant effects of treatment group (p<0.0001 for all), with the greatest change in the EVT +tPA group, then EVT only group, followed by tPA only, followed by no intervention. Differences between EVT + tPA and EVT only were not significant (p=.30 to 0.79 across outcomes). For patients with aphasia and/or right sided weakness before treatment, the percent change in language was significantly greater than the percent change in weakness (29.8% vs. 12.7%; t(93)=5.3;p<0.0001). Greater percent improvement in language was observed in all treatment groups (p=0.0003 to 0.03 across treatment groups). In patients with acute ischemic stroke due to LVO, improvements in all neurological functions occur with tPA, and even more with EVT (with and without IV tPA). However, gains in language are even greater than gains in motor function with both interventions. Few patients had neglect before treatment, but of those who did, the majority improved, and most (92.8%) improved with EVT.