Intravenous Thrombolysis Group Research Articles

Intravenous thrombolysis and risk of early-onset post-stroke depression: a propensity score matched cohort study

BackgroundDepression is common in stroke survivors and affects their recovery and quality of life (QoL). Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) can improve post-stroke outcomes but the impact on early-onset post-stroke depression (PSD) is unclear. This was evaluated by comparing depression symptoms between patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) with vs. without IVT.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included 633 patients with AIS. The 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale was used to evaluate depression in patients 14–21 days after stroke onset. Propensity score matching was used to minimize intervention bias between the two groups.ResultsOf the 633 patients, 120 (19.0%) received IVT and 513 (81%) did not. Before matching, the prevalence of early-onset PSD was lower in the IVT group than in the non-IVT group (18.3% vs. 29.2%, p < 0.05). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the risk of early-onset PSD was significantly lower in the IVT group than in the non-IVT group [odds ratio (OR) = 0.48; 95% confidence interval: 0.28–0.83]. The results were stable after adjusting for potential confounders by inverse probability of treatment weighting and using a pairwise algorithm based on propensity scores (ORs between 0.44 and 0.61, all p < 0.05); were robust to unmeasured confounding as assessed by E-value analysis; and were consistent in subgroup analyses.ConclusionIVT is associated with a reduced risk of early-onset PSD and can improve the QoL of patients with AIS during post-stroke recovery.

Intravenous thrombolysis versus dual antiplatelet therapy in minor ischemic stroke within the thrombolytic window (TAMIS): a multicenter cohort study.

Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) have been widely used in minor ischemic stroke (MIS) treatment. However, the clinical outcomes and safety of these two treatments have not been compared within the early thrombolytic time window. Here, we conducted a multicenter, ambispective cohort study involving patients with MIS presenting within 4.5 h of symptom onset at 3 affiliated hospitals of Jinan University from 2018-2022. The patients were divided into the IVT group and DAPT group. The primary outcome was a 90-day excellent outcome (mRS ≤ 1). A total of 1,026 patients were enrolled, of whom 492 were assigned to the IVT group and 534 were assigned to the DAPT group. The IVT group had better 90-day excellent outcomes (mRS ≤ 1) than the DAPT group (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.14-2.52, P = 0.010). Among the 623 patients with nondisabling stroke, the proportion of mRS ≤ 1 in the IVT group was higher than the DAPT group (P = 0.009). In the subtypes of MIS with large vessel occlusion/stenosis and with isolated symptoms, the 90-day outcomes of the IVT group and DAPT group were not different (P > 0.05). In conclusion, compared with DAPT, IVT was associated with better 90-day clinical outcomes in patients with MIS (in particular, for those with mRS > 1), including earlier clinical improvement.IVT also benefited the early neurological improvement of patients with severe stenosis/occlusion of intracranial large vessels, nondisabling mild stroke, nondisabling mild stroke with isolated symptoms.

Outcome of intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke patients with small vessel disease

IntroductionLacunar stroke (LS) subtype accounts for a quarter of ischemic strokes. Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) is known to improve overall stroke outcomes. Very few studies have focused on the outcome of IVT in lacunar strokes. Aim: To detect the outcome of IVT in LS patients compared to non-thrombolysed LS patients. MethodsFifty patients presenting with LS received the standard protocol of IVT (Group I). They were compared to fifty matched LS patients who presented beyond the time window and were selected as the control group (Group II). Clinical outcome was measured using NIHSS within 24 h, NIHSS at discharge, and MRS after 3 months. Risk factors that could have affected clinical outcomes were compared in the thrombolysis group. ResultsThe short-term clinical outcome of Group I showed statistically significant improvement of NIHSS after 24 hrs compared to Group II (mean NIHSS = 5.52±3.89 and 7.44±1.82 respectively), as well as on discharge (mean NIHSS = 3.88±3.50 and 5.78±2.97) respectively. For long-term outcomes, 94 % of GroupⅠ reached MRS 0, 1, and 2 (n = 47/50) versus 74 % (n = 36/50) in Group II. Longer door-to-needle time, severe WMCs (Fazekas score), and pneumonia were shown to be significant predictor factors for the worst outcome. ConclusionIVT has improved short- and long-term outcomes in LS patients. Longer door-to-needle time, severe WMCs, and pneumonia were shown to be significant predictor factors for the worst outcome.

Quality of life in acute ischaemic stroke patients treated with recanalisation

<p>Stroke is a serious health problem that has a significant impact on health-related quality of life. Despite the increasing popularity of measuring quality of life among patients, it is not routinely measured in clinical practice, and therefore little is known about how well clinical measures reflect quality of life after stroke. The aim of this study was to investigate the quality of life of patients with acute ischaemic stroke.</p>. <p>For the prospective study, patients diagnosed with acute ischemic stroke at the Neurology Clinic of the Clinical Center of the University of P&eacute;cs were selected through convenience sampling between June 2022 and May 2023. Based on the treatments, patients were divided into three groups: mechanical thrombectomy (MT), intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), and standard care (SC). Modified Rankin Scale (Pre-mRS, Follow-up mRS), NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS), and European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions Scale (EQ-5D-5L) were used in the research. Descriptive statistics, paired T-tests, Wilcoxon tests, McNemar tests and Pearson correlation analysis were applied for the analysis (SPSS 25.0; p &lt;0.05).</p>. <p>A total of 198 participants (115 males, 83 females) took part in the study (MT: 50, IVT: 69, SC: 79). The Pre-mRS and follow-up mRS values indicate that the majority of patients in all three groups fell into the mild category (Pre-mRS: 176 participants; 88%, follow-up mRS: 158 participants; 80%). There was a significant improvement in NIHSS scores in all three groups (IVT: 4.36 vs. 1.57, p&lt;0.001; MT: 8.98 vs. 4.50, p&lt;0.001; SC: 4.38 vs. 2.84, p&lt;0.001). The EQ-5D-5L value also significantly increased for all groups (IVT: 0.82 vs. 0.88, p&lt;0.001; MT: 0.63 vs. 0.73, p&lt;0.001, SC: 0.76 vs. 0.80, p=0.014). Patients admitted with lower NIHSS values reported better quality of life at the end of our study (r: -0.43451).</p>. <p>At 30 days, significant improvement was observed in MT, IVT and SC groups when measured with EQ-5D-5L, but the extent of improvement was highest in the MT group.</p>.

Endovascular Treatment With or Without Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke Due to Tandem Occlusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Endovascular treatment (EVT) has been demonstrated to be effective for patients with tandem occlusion. The efficacy and safety of intravenous thrombolysis before EVT in patients with tandem occlusion remain debatable. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis with PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to September 2023. The primary outcome was functional independence, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2 at 90 days. The secondary outcomes included the successful recanalization rate, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, and mortality at 90 days. In total, 9 studies with 1838 enrolled participants were identified. Our results showed that, compared with treatment with EVT alone, intravenous thrombolysis before EVT was associated with a greater proportion of functional independence at 90 days (odds ratio [OR], 1.39 [95% CI, 1.14-1.69]; P=0.001), a greater rate of successful recanalization (OR, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.11-1.89]; P=0.007) and decreased mortality (OR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.50-0.93]; P=0.02). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage between the intravenous thrombolysis plus EVT group and the EVT alone group (OR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.79-1.70]; P=0.45). In patients with acute ischemic stroke and tandem occlusion, intravenous thrombolysis before EVT was associated with a greater rate of favorable functional outcomes and successful recanalization and a lower mortality rate without an increased risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage compared with patients receiving EVT alone.

Assessment of Thrombectomy versus Combined Thrombolysis and Thrombectomy in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke and Medium Vessel Occlusion.

Background The combination of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with mechanical thrombectomy (MT) may have clinical benefits for patients with medium vessel occlusion. Purpose To examine whether MT combined with IVT is associated with different outcomes than MT alone in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and medium vessel occlusion. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included consecutive adult patients with AIS and medium vessel occlusion treated with MT or MT with IVT at 37 academic centers in North America, Asia, and Europe. Data were collected from September 2017 to July 2021. Propensity score matching was performed to reduce confounding. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to test the association between the addition of IVT treatment and different functional and safety outcomes. Results After propensity score matching, 670 patients (median age, 75 years [IQR, 64-82 years]; 356 female) were included in the analysis; 335 underwent MT alone and 335 underwent MT with IVT. Median onset to puncture (350 vs 210 minutes, P < .001) and onset to recanalization (397 vs 273 minutes, P < .001) times were higher in the MT group than the MT with IVT group, respectively. In the univariable regression analysis, the addition of IVT was associated with higher odds of a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 0-2 (odds ratio [OR], 1.44; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.96; P = .019); however, this association was not observed in the multivariable analysis (OR, 1.37; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.89; P = .054). In the multivariable analysis, the addition of IVT also showed no evidence of an association with the odds of first-pass effect (OR, 1.27; 95% CI: 0.9, 1.79; P = .17), Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction grades 2b-3 (OR, 1.64; 95% CI: 0.99, 2.73; P = .055), mRS scores 0-1 (OR, 1.27; 95% CI: 0.91, 1.76; P = .16), mortality (OR, 0.78; 95% CI: 0.49, 1.24; P = .29), or intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 1.25; 95% CI: 0.88, 1.76; P = .21). Conclusion Adjunctive IVT may not provide benefit to MT in patients with AIS caused by distal and medium vessel occlusion. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Wojak in this issue.

Impact of demographic and clinical factors on in-hospital delays in acute ischemic stroke treatment.

Delays in reperfusion treatment, both intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and endovascular treatment (EVT), adversely affect outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). To alleviate these delays, it is essential to comprehend how patients' baseline and stroke characteristics impact in-hospital reperfusion delays. While demographic and socioeconomic factors affect stroke outcomes, their impact on in-hospital delays remains unclear. This is retrospective analysis at a tertiary stroke center, encompassing AIS patients receiving IVT and / or EVT between 2019 and 2022 (re-canalization cohort). Outcomes of interest were time intervals of admission to CT and admission to recanalization. Univariable analyses explored age, gender, baseline functional status, socioeconomic status (SES), ethnicity, vascular risk factors, and stroke characteristics. Subsequently, multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. Altogether, 313 patients treated with IVT and 293 with EVT were included in the re-canalization cohort. No demographic variables were found to be associated with stroke treatment time intervals. Following multivariable analysis, stroke severity (low NIHSS, p < 0.01), arrival to the hospital by other means than ambulance (p < 0.01), and atypical stroke symptoms (p < 0.01), were associated with in-hospital delays, both in the EVT and the IVT groups. Our findings indicate that patients with a more severe ischemic stroke, typical stroke symptoms, and arrival by ambulance have shorter stroke treatment time intervals. These results emphasize that, in atypical cases, even a lower suspicion of stroke should promote urgent workup for stroke diagnosis. Our findings do not indicate any influence of demographic or SES on in-hospital reperfusion delays.

Comparing Outcomes of Thrombectomy Versus Intravenous Thrombolysis Based on Middle Cerebral Artery M2 Occlusion Features.

Current evidence provides limited support for the superiority of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in patients with M2 segment middle cerebral artery occlusion. We aim to investigate whether imaging features of M2 segment occlusion impact the effectiveness of EVT. We conducted a retrospective cohort study from January 2017 to January 2022, drawing data from the CASE II registry (Computer-Based Online Database of Acute Stroke Patients for Stroke Management Quality Evaluation), which specifically documented patients with acute ischemic stroke presenting with M2 segment occlusion undergoing reperfusion therapy. Patients were stratified into the intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) group (IVT alone) and EVT group (IVT plus EVT or EVT alone). The primary outcome was a modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 2 at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included additional thresholds and distribution of modified Rankin Scale scores, 24-hour recanalization, early neurological deterioration, and relevant complications during hospitalization. Safety outcomes encompassed intracranial hemorrhagic events at 24 hours and mortality at 90 days. Binary logistic regression analyses with propensity score matching were used. Subgroup analyses were performed based on the anatomic site of occlusion, including right versus left, proximal versus distal, dominant/co-dominant versus nondominant, single versus double/triple branch(es), and anterior versus central/posterior branch. Among 734 patients (43.3% were females; median age, 73 years) with M2 segment occlusion, 342 (46.6%) were in the EVT group. Propensity score matching analysis revealed no statistical difference in the primary outcome (odds ratio, 0.860 [95% CI, 0.611-1.209]; P=0.385) between the EVT group and IVT group. However, EVT was associated with a higher incidence of subarachnoid hemorrhage (odds ratio, 6.655 [95% CI, 1.487-29.788]; P=0.004) and pneumonia (odds ratio, 2.015 [95% CI, 1.364-2.977]; P<0.001). Subgroup analyses indicated that patients in the IVT group achieved better outcomes when presenting with right, distal, or nondominant branch occlusion (Pall interaction<0.05). Our study showed similar efficiency of EVT versus IVT alone in acute M2 segment middle cerebral artery occlusion. This suggested that only specific patient subpopulations might have a potentially higher benefit of EVT over IVT alone. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04487340.

Outcomes of Bridging Intravenous Thrombolysis Versus Endovascular Therapy Alone in Late-Window Acute Ischemic Stroke.

Studies comparing bridging intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with direct endovascular therapy (EVT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke who present late are limited. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and safety of bridging IVT in patients with acute ischemic stroke due to anterior circulation large vessel occlusion who underwent EVT 6 to 24 hours after time last known well. We enrolled patients with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion stroke and a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of ≥6 from 20 centers across 10 countries in the multicenter retrospective CLEAR study (CT for Late Endovascular Reperfusion) between January 2014 and May 2022. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting modeling adjusted for clinical and imaging confounders to compare functional outcomes, reperfusion success, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and mortality between EVT patients with and without prior IVT. Of 5098 patients screened for eligibility, we included 2749 patients, of whom 549 received bridging IVT before EVT. The timing of IVT was not recorded. Witnessed stroke onset and transfer rates were higher in the bridging IVT group (25% versus 12% and 77% versus 55%, respectively, P value for both <0.0001), and time intervals between stroke onset and treatment were shorter (time last known well-start of EVT median 560 minutes [interquartile range, 432-791] versus 724 minutes [interquartile range, 544-912]; P<0.0001). After adjustment for confounders, there was no difference in functional outcome at 3 months (adjusted common odds ratio for modified Rankin Scale shift, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.89-1.19]; P=0.72) or successful reperfusion (adjusted odds ratio, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.81-1.75]; P=0.39). There were no safety concerns associated with bridging IVT versus direct EVT (symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage: adjusted odds ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.38-1.48]; P=0.40; mortality: adjusted odds ratio, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.89-1.46]; P=0.31). Results were unchanged when the analysis was limited to patients who received IVT >6 hours after last known well. In patients with an anterior circulation large vessel occlusion stroke who underwent EVT 6 to 24 hours from last known well, bridging IVT was not associated with a difference in outcomes compared with direct EVT. URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04096248.

Remote Ischemic Conditioning With Medical Management or Reperfusion Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is a low-cost, accessible, and noninvasive neuroprotective treatment strategy, but its efficacy and safety in acute ischemic stroke are controversial. With the publication of several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the recent results of the RESIST trial, it may be possible to identify the patient population that may (or may not) benefit from RIC. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of RIC in patients with ischemic stroke receiving different treatments by pooling data of all randomized controlled studies to date. We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Elsevier, and Web of Science databases to obtain articles in all languages from inception until May 25, 2023. The primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at the specified endpoint time in the trial. The secondary outcomes were change in NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and recurrence of stroke events. The safety outcomes were cardiovascular events, cerebral hemorrhage, and mortality. The quality of articles was evaluated through the Cochrane risk assessment tool. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023430073). There were 7,657 patients from 22 RCTs included. Compared with the control group, patients who received RIC did not have improved mRS functional outcomes, regardless of whether they received medical management, reperfusion therapy with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), or mechanical thrombectomy (MT). In the medical management group, patients who received RIC had decreased incidence of stroke recurrence (risk ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.43-0.92, p = 0.02) and lower follow-up NIHSS score by 1.72 points compared with the control group (p < 0.00001). There was no increased risk of adverse events including death or cerebral hemorrhage in the IVT or medical management group. In patients with ischemic stroke who are not eligible for reperfusion therapy, RIC did not affect mRS functional outcomes but significantly improved the NIHSS score at the follow-up endpoint and reduced stroke recurrence, without increasing the risk of cerebral hemorrhage or death. In patients who received IVT or MT, the benefit of RIC was not observed.

Thrombolysis for Wake-Up Stroke Versus Non-Wake-Up Unwitnessed Stroke: EOS Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.

Stroke with unknown time of onset can be categorized into 2 groups; wake-up stroke (WUS) and unwitnessed stroke with an onset time unavailable for reasons other than wake-up (non-wake-up unwitnessed stroke, non-WUS). We aimed to assess potential differences in the efficacy and safety of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) between these subgroups. Patients with an unknown-onset stroke were evaluated using individual patient-level data of 2 randomized controlled trials (WAKE-UP [Efficacy and Safety of MRI-Based Thrombolysis in Wake-Up Stroke], THAWS [Thrombolysis for Acute Wake-Up and Unclear-Onset Strokes With Alteplase at 0.6 mg/kg]) comparing IVT with placebo or standard treatment from the EOS (Evaluation of Unknown-Onset Stroke Thrombolysis trial) data set. A favorable outcome was prespecified as a modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 1 at 90 days. Safety outcomes included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage at 22 to 36 hours and 90-day mortality. The IVT effect was compared between the treatment groups in the WUS and non-WUS with multivariable logistic regression analysis. Six hundred thirty-four patients from 2 trials were analyzed; 542 had WUS (191 women, 272 receiving alteplase), and 92 had non-WUS (42 women, 43 receiving alteplase). Overall, no significant interaction was noted between the mode of onset and treatment effect (P value for interaction=0.796). In patients with WUS, the frequencies of favorable outcomes were 54.8% and 45.5% in the IVT and control groups, respectively (adjusted odds ratio, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.01-2.16]). Death occurred in 4.0% and 1.9%, respectively (P=0.162), and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage in 1.8% and 0.3%, respectively (P=0.194). In patients with non-WUS, no significant difference was observed in favorable outcomes relative to the control (37.2% versus 29.2%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.76 [0.58-5.37]). One death and one symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage were reported in the IVT group, but none in the control. There was no difference in the effect of IVT between patients with WUS and non-WUS. IVT showed a significant benefit in patients with WUS, while there was insufficient statistical power to detect a substantial benefit in the non-WUS subgroup. URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: CRD42020166903.

Impact of Early Mobilization on Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Treated With Thrombolysis or Thrombectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background Early mobilization (EM) within 24 to 72 hours post-stroke may improve patients’ performance and ability. However, after intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) or mechanical thrombectomy (MT), the increased risk of hemorrhagic complications impacts the implementation of early out-of-bed mobilization. Few studies have investigated EM after IVT or MT for acute ischemic stroke (AIS), and its impact in these patients is unknown. Objective To investigate the effect of EM on AIS treated with IVT or MT.| Methods We recruited 122 patients with first AIS; 60 patients were treated with IVT, and 62 patients were treated with MT. For each IVT and MT cohort, the control groups received standard early rehabilitation, and the intervention groups received an EM protocol. The training lasted 30 minutes/day, 5 days/week until discharge. Main Outcomes Measures The effectiveness of the interventions was evaluated using the motor domain of the Functional Independence Measure (FIM-motor) and the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (PASS) at baseline, 2-week, 4-week, and 3-month post-stroke, the Functional Ambulation Category 2-week post-stroke, and the total length of stay at the stroke center. Results Both IVT and MT treatment groups showed improved FIM-motor and PASS scores over time; however, only the IVT EM group had significantly improved FIM-motor performance within 1 month after stroke than the control group. Conclusion. An EM protocol with the same intervention time and session frequency per day as in the standard care protocol was effective in improving the functional ability of stroke patients after IVT.

Time to Treatment With Intravenous Thrombolysis Before Thrombectomy and Functional Outcomes in Acute Ischemic Stroke

The benefit of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) for acute ischemic stroke declines with longer time from symptom onset, but it is not known whether a similar time dependency exists for IVT followed by thrombectomy. To determine whether the benefit associated with IVT plus thrombectomy vs thrombectomy alone decreases with treatment time from symptom onset. Individual participant data meta-analysis from 6 randomized clinical trials comparing IVT plus thrombectomy vs thrombectomy alone. Enrollment was between January 2017 and July 2021 at 190 sites in 15 countries. All participants were eligible for IVT and thrombectomy and presented directly at thrombectomy-capable stroke centers (n = 2334). For this meta-analysis, only patients with an anterior circulation large-vessel occlusion were included (n = 2313). Interval from stroke symptom onset to expected administration of IVT and treatment with IVT plus thrombectomy vs thrombectomy alone. The primary outcome analysis tested whether the association between the allocated treatment (IVT plus thrombectomy vs thrombectomy alone) and disability at 90 days (7-level modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score range, 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]; minimal clinically important difference for the rates of mRS scores of 0-2: 1.3%) varied with times from symptom onset to expected administration of IVT. In 2313 participants (1160 in IVT plus thrombectomy group vs 1153 in thrombectomy alone group; median age, 71 [IQR, 62 to 78] years; 44.3% were female), the median time from symptom onset to expected administration of IVT was 2 hours 28 minutes (IQR, 1 hour 46 minutes to 3 hours 17 minutes). There was a statistically significant interaction between the time from symptom onset to expected administration of IVT and the association of allocated treatment with functional outcomes (ratio of adjusted common odds ratio [OR] per 1-hour delay, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.72 to 0.97], P = .02 for interaction). The benefit of IVT plus thrombectomy decreased with longer times from symptom onset to expected administration of IVT (adjusted common OR for a 1-step mRS score shift toward improvement, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.13 to 1.96] at 1 hour, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.04 to 1.49] at 2 hours, and 1.04 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.23] at 3 hours). For a mRS score of 0, 1, or 2, the predicted absolute risk difference was 9% (95% CI, 3% to 16%) at 1 hour, 5% (95% CI, 1% to 9%) at 2 hours, and 1% (95% CI, -3% to 5%) at 3 hours. After 2 hours 20 minutes, the benefit associated with IVT plus thrombectomy was not statistically significant and the point estimate crossed the null association at 3 hours 14 minutes. In patients presenting at thrombectomy-capable stroke centers, the benefit associated with IVT plus thrombectomy vs thrombectomy alone was time dependent and statistically significant only if the time from symptom onset to expected administration of IVT was short.

Abstract TP278: Identifying High-Risk Patients With Poor Prognosis in Acute Phase of Ischemic Stroke: Treatment-Specific Risk Scales Developed From the National Neurological Medical Center of China

Background: There is still a lack of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) prognostic prediction scales to assist in more scientific and efficient clinical management of patients. Objective: Real-world data were utilized to construct and validate an easily popularized prediction score for poor prognosis in the acute phase of AIS so as to provide a basis for clinical monitoring and intervention of specific indicators. Method: Patients discharged from Huashan Hospital, Fudan University between 2015 and 2021 were consecutively included. AIS with premorbid mRS ≤ 2 within 72 hours of onset was included. Patients treated with arterial thrombectomy were excluded. Subjects were divided into "intravenous thrombolysis group" and "non-intravenous thrombolysis group". Based on the data of discharge patients from 2015 to 2020 (Model Training Set), logistic regression model with restricted cubic splines were applied to construct the "prognostic scale of AIS acute stage based on treatment stratification, PAIST Scale". Performance of the scale was tested using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) based on data from patients discharged in 2021 (External Validation Set). Result: A total of 1971 patients (437 thrombolysis) were included. The "PAIST Scale" of the thrombolysis patients included: Baseline NIHSS (5-15 = 11, ≥ 16 = 20), deep vein thrombosis (yes = 5), Neuron specific enolase (&gt; 13 ng/ml = 3), and neutrophil percentage (&gt; 70% = 5). The "PAIST Scale" of the Non-thrombolytic population: Baseline NIHSS (5-15 = 12, ≥ 16 = 20), deep venous thrombosis (yes = 4), Neuron specific enolase (&gt; 12.5 ng/ml = 1), neutrophil percentage (&gt; 66% = 3), age (&gt; 64y = 2), fasting blood glucose (&gt; 5.8 mmol/l = 2), serum potassium (&lt; 3.8 mmol/L = 1). In the external validation set, the AUC-ROC values of "PAIST Scale" were 0.855 in the non-thrombolysis group and 0.778 in the thrombolysis group. Meanwhile, patients defined as high-risk by the "PAIST scale" had an actual incidence of poor prognosis of 76.92% in the thrombolysis group (&gt; 19 points) and 61.11% in the non-thrombolysis group (&gt; 17 points). Conclusion: The "PAIST Scale" established in this study can effectively identify patients at high risk of poor prognosis in the acute phase among patients with mild to moderate stroke.

Thrombectomy versus combined thrombolysis and thrombectomy in patients with large vessel occlusion and chronic kidney disease

BackgroundWhether intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) should be bridged before mechanical thrombectomy (MT) remains uncertain in patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). MethodsThis research systematically enrolled every patient with both acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and CKD who received MT and fulfilled the criteria for IVT from January 2015 to December 2022. According to whether they underwent IVT, the patients were categorized into two cohorts: MT and combined IVT + MT. A binary logistic regression model was used to adjust for potential confounders, and propensity score matching analysis was used to assess the efficacy and safety of IVT in AIS patients with CKD who underwent MT. ResultsA total number of 406 patients were ultimately included in this study, with 236 patients in the MT group and 170 in the combined group. After PSM, there were 170 patients in the MT group and 170 in the combined group, and the clinical characteristics between the two groups were well balanced. The MT + IVT group had better long-term functional outcomes than the MT group (35.9% versus 21.2%, P = 0.003) and more modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (mTICI) (2b-3) (94.1% versus 87.6%, P = 0.038), while no significant difference was found regarding symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). In line with the results observed in the in the postmatched population, the logistic regression revealed that patients in the IVT + MT group demonstrated superior clinical outcomes (adjusted OR 0.440 [95% CI (0.267–0.726)], P = 0.001) in the prematched population. ConclusionFor LVO patients with CKD and indications for IVT, IVT bridging MT improves their prognosis compared with direct MT.

Intravenous Thrombolysis Before Endovascular Treatment in Posterior Circulation Occlusions: A MR CLEAN Registry Study.

The effectiveness of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) before endovascular treatment (EVT) has been investigated in randomized trials and meta-analyses. These studies mainly concerned anterior circulation occlusions. We aimed to investigate clinical, technical, and safety outcomes of IVT before EVT in posterior circulation occlusions in a nationwide registry. Patients were included from the MR CLEAN Registry (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands), a nationwide, prospective, multicenter registry of patients with acute ischemic stroke due to a large intracranial vessel occlusion receiving EVT between 2014 and 2019. All patients with a posterior circulation occlusion were included. Primary outcome was a shift toward better functional outcome on the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days. Secondary outcomes were favorable functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale scores, 0-3), occurrence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhages, successful reperfusion (extended Thrombolysis in Cerebral Ischemia ≥2B), first-attempt successful reperfusion, and mortality at 90 days. Regression analyses with adjustments based on univariable analyses and literature were applied. A total of 248 patients were included, who received either IVT (n=125) or no IVT (n=123) before EVT. Results show no differences in a shift on the modified Rankin Scale (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.61-1.76]). Although symptomatic intracranial hemorrhages occurred more often in the IVT group (4.8% versus 2.4%), regression analysis did not show a significant difference (adjusted odds ratio, 1.65 [95% CI, 0.33-8.35]). Successful reperfusion, favorable functional outcome, first-attempt successful reperfusion, and mortality did not differ between patients treated with and without IVT. We found no significant differences in clinical, technical, and safety outcomes between patients with a large vessel occlusion in the posterior circulation treated with or without IVT before EVT. Our results are in line with the literature on the anterior circulation.

Long-term outcomes of intravenous fibrinolysis in central retinal artery occlusion

Central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO) is an ophthalmologic emergency that can lead to irreversible loss of vision. Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) has been used experimentally for its treatment. Our study aimed to evaluate the effect of emergency IVT on CRAO and its impact on visual acuity outcomes. We conducted a retrospective observational study of patients with CRAO. A total of 46 patients with CRAO were analysed; 16 patients received IVT treatment (IVT group) while 30 did not (no-IVT group). Seven patients from the IVT group received IVT early, within 4.5 hours (h) after the onset of symptoms (early-IVT), and 9 patients received it beyond this timeframe (late-IVT). The median time-to-hospital was 8.5 h: 3 h for the IVT group and 24 h for the no-IVT group. The median time-to-treatment was 5 h. The median outcome of visual acuity was 0.05 in the early-IVT, 0.025 in the late-IVT, and 0.01 in the no-IVT group. Among patients who received IVT early, 86% exhibited significant visual improvement. This improvement was four-fold greater compared to all other groups (p = 0.040), including the late-IVT (p = 0.011) and no-IVT groups (p = 0.023). No complications of the treatment were reported. Our study confirms that the administration of IVT treatment for CRAO within the 4.5-h time window is both safe and effective.

Outcomes of endovascular treatment alone or with intravenous alteplase in acute ischemic stroke Patients: A retrospective cohort study

ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes, safety, and workflow of patients who underwent endovascular treatment (EVT) alone or in combination with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), against a control group who only received EVT. MethodsA retrospective analysis from May 2018 to September 2021 was conducted on 50 patients exhibiting acute ischemic stroke symptoms. 35 patients received EVT alone, while 15 received EVT and IVT. The data collected included demographic information, comorbid diseases, symptom onset time, duration from admission to puncture, and clinical outcomes via the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score and modified Rankin scale score at admission and 90 days post-procedure. ResultsNo significant differences were observed in the 90-day modified Rankin scale scores between the EVT + IVT and EVT alone groups (p > 0.05). NIHSS scores were also similar between the groups (p > 0.05). The EVT + IVT group demonstrated higher intracranial hemorrhage and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage rates than the EVT alone group, but the difference became insignificant after adjusting for age and sex (p < 0.01). Mortality outcomes showed no significant difference (p > 0.05). ConclusionThe combined EVT and IVT treatment's safety outcomes are not inferior, aligning with existing literature.

Mechanical thrombectomy combined with intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analyses

To assess the clinical value of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) combined with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) by comparing it with the MT alone. In this study, we conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis of both observational and randomized controlled studies (RCTs) to investigate various outcomes. Our search for relevant studies was conducted between January 2011 and June 2022 in four major databases: PubMed, Embase, WOS, and Cochrane Library. We collected data on several outcomes, including functional independence (FI; defined as modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 2), excellent outcomes (mRS 0–1), successful recanalization (SR), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), any intracerebral hemorrhage (aICH), and mortality at three months or discharge. The primary efficacy outcome and safety outcome were FI and sICH, respectively, whereas excellent outcomes and SR were considered secondary efficacy outcomes. Additionally, mortality and aICH were analyzed as secondary safety outcomes. We employed the Mantel–Haenszel fixed-effects model for RCTs when I2 < 50%, otherwise the random-effects model was utilized. For observational studies and subgroup analyses, we used the random-effects model to minimize potential bias. A total of 55 eligible studies (nine RCTs and 46 observational studies) were included. For RCTs, the MT + IVT group was superior in FI (OR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.11–1.46), excellent outcomes (OR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.03–1.43), SR (OR: 1.23, 95% CI: 1.05–1.45), mortality (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.54–0.97) in crude analyses. In adjusted analyses, the MT + IVT group reduced the risk of mortality (OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.49–0.88). However, the difference in FI between the MT + IVT group and the MT alone group was not significant (OR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.99–1.38, Fig. 3a). For observational studies, the results of FI (OR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.16–1.33), excellent outcomes (OR: 1.30, 95% CI: 1.09–1.54), SR (OR: 1.23, 95% CI: 1.05–1.44), mortality (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.64–0.77) in the MT + IVT group were better. Additionally, the MT + IVT group increased the risk of hemorrhagic transformation (HT) including sICH (OR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.11–1.21) and aICH (OR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.05–1.46) in crude analyses. In adjusted analyses, significant better outcomes were seen in the MT + IVT group on FI (OR: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.21–1.52), excellent outcomes (OR: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.26–1.75), and mortality (OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.56–0.94). The MT + IVT therapy did improve the prognosis for AIS patients and did not increase the risk of HT compared with MT alone therapy.

Intravenous Thrombolysis or Medical Management for Minor Strokes.

To evaluate the outcomes of acute ischemic stroke patients with minor deficits treated with either intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) or routine medical management (MM). The study included patients with acute ischemic stroke and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores of 5 or less who were treated with IVT within 4.5 hours from symptom onset and were classified as the IVT group. The MM group consisted of an equal number of patients with minor strokes, matched for sex, age, and severity, who did not receive thrombolysis. Data on patient information were collected for both groups. A total of 26,236 patients were included in this study (13,208 in IVT and 13,208 in MM). Of these patients, 67.9% were men, and the mean age was 67.1 years (standard deviation: 10.9). At 3 months, the IVT group had a higher rate of stroke-independent outcome (Rankin Scale score of 0-2) compared with the MM group (IVT vs. MM: 91.6 vs. 88.6%, absolute difference: 2.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-3.4%, p = 0.008; adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.2, 95% CI: 1.1-1.4, p = 0.003). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in 3-month mortality rates between the IVT and MM groups (IVT vs. MM: 2.1 vs. 2.5%, absolute difference: -0.6%, 95% CI: -1.1 to 0.3%, p = 0.11; adjusted HR: 0.9, 95% CI: 0.8-1.2, p = 0.09). Compared with MM, IVT does not reduce mortality in minor ischemic stroke but improves functional outcomes in minor stroke with an NIHSS score of 3 to 5.