scholarly journals Risk of Intracranial Hemorrhage after Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 57-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yonggang Hao ◽  
Zhizhong Zhang ◽  
Hao Zhang ◽  
Lili Xu ◽  
Zusen Ye ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Medical Treatment ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Major Complication ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trials ◽  
Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage

Background: Intracranial hemorrhage is a major complication of endovascular treatment in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Controlled clinical trials reported varied incidences of intracranial hemorrhage after endovascular treatment. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate whether endovascular treatment, compared with medical treatment, increases the risk of intracranial hemorrhage in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Methods: The current publications on endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke were systematically reviewed. Rates of intracranial hemorrhage after endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke reported in controlled clinical trials were pooled and analyzed. Random and fixed-effect models were used to pool the outcomes. For analyzing their individual risks, intracranial hemorrhages after endovascular treatment were classified as symptomatic and asymptomatic. Results: Eleven studies involving 1,499 patients with endovascular treatment and 1,320 patients with medical treatment were included. After pooling the data, the risk of any intracranial hemorrhage was significantly higher in patients with endovascular treatment than in patients with medical treatment (35.0 vs. 19.0%, OR = 2.55, 95% CI: 1.64-3.97, p < 0.00001). The risk of asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was also significantly higher in patients with endovascular treatment than in those with medical treatment (28 vs. 12%, OR = 3.16, 95% CI: 1.62-6.16, p < 0.001). However, the risks of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage were similar in patients with endovascular treatment and in those with medical treatment (5.6 vs. 5.2%, OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.79-1.50, p = 0.61). Conclusion: Although the risk of any intracranial hemorrhage may increase after endovascular treatment, the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage may remain similar as compared with medical treatment.

scholarly journals The Application of Tirofiban in the Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Lisha Tang ◽  
Xiangqi Tang ◽  
Qianwen Yang
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Symptomatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage ◽  
Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> The purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tirofiban during endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) databases for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies (published before May 1, 2020; no language restrictions) comparing tirofiban administration to blank control during EVT in patients with AIS. Our primary end points were the 3-month functional outcome, recanalization rate, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, and 3-month mortality. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The incidence of 3-month modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0–2 score of the tirofiban group was higher than that of the control group (odds ratio [OR] = 1.27, 95% CI [1.09, 1.48], <i>p</i> = 0.002) with heterogeneity (<i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 34%, <i>p</i> = 0.11). Data pooled from the 6 studies describing the details of retriever stent in EVT revealed that tirofiban was associated with higher incidence of 3-month mRS 0–2 score (OR = 1.48, 95% CI [1.11, 1.96], <i>p</i> = 0.007). The recanalization rate was higher in the tirofiban group compared to the control group (OR = 1.66, 95% CI [1.16, 2.39], <i>p</i> = 0.006). There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR = 0.97, 95% CI [0.73, 1.31], <i>p</i> = 0.86) and intracranial hemorrhage (OR = 1.08, 95% CI [0.59, 1.97], <i>p</i> = 0.80) between tirofiban and non-tirofiban group. Besides, the tirofiban administration was associated with lower mortality (OR = 0.75, 95% CI [0.62, 0.91], <i>p</i> = 0.003). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> The application of tirofiban in EVT of AIS may improve functional outcomes and reduce mortality at 3 months. Besides, tirofiban does not seem to increase the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and intracranial hemorrhage, either in the anterior or posterior circulation stroke.

scholarly journals Predictors for Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage After Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke

Stroke ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (5) ◽  
pp. 1203-1209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yonggang Hao ◽  
Dong Yang ◽  
Huaiming Wang ◽  
Wenjie Zi ◽  
Meng Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage

scholarly journals Tenecteplase versus alteplase for acute ischemic stroke thrombolysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 671-683
Author(s):  
YinQin Hu ◽  
YangBo Hou ◽  
Zhen Chen ◽  
Qian Xiao ◽  
Huixia Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Intravenous Thrombolysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Nihss Score ◽  
Thrombolytic Drug ◽  
Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage

Background: Intravenous thrombolysis is the preferred clinical treatment for acute ischemic stroke. Alteplase is an intravenous thrombolytic drug used in clinical practice. Recently, studies have shown the efficacy of another intravenous thrombolytic drug, tenecteplase, and have reported that the risk of bleeding is low. However, at present, Chinese and international research has yielded controversial results regarding the efficacy and risks of tenecteplase. Therefore, this systematic review and meta- analysis of the efficacy and safety of tenecteplase were performed. Methods: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, the Wanfang Database and CNKI were searched for all studies on the thrombolytic treatment of acute ischemic stroke. All studies published in English prior to March 2021 were retrieved. The studies were screened and selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Then, the data were extracted and recorded by trained researchers. RevMan 5.4 statistical software was used to analyze the data on the 24h recanalization rate, early neurological improvement (24h reduction in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] score of at least 8 points or 24 h NIHSS score of 0~1 point), mRS score at 90 days, intracranial hemorrhage, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and mortality in the tenecteplase group and alteplase group. Results: A total of 565 related studies were identified through the initial searches in each database. The citations of meta-analyses and related reviews were screened for additional eligible articles. Eventually, 9 high-quality English-language articles that included 2149 patients with acute ischemic stroke (including 1035 in the tenecteplase group and 1046 in the alteplase group)were included in this meta-analysis. The meta-analysis results were as follows: (1) Efficacy: The 24 h recanalization rate with regard to vascular recanalization was significantly better in the tenecteplase group than in the alteplase group(OR = 1.83, 95% CI: 1.23~2.72, z = 2.97, P = 0.003). There was significantly greater improvement in early neurological function in the tenecteplase group than in the alteplase group (OR= 1.34, 95% CI: 1.11~1.63, Z=3.00, P =0.003). There were no significant differences in 90-day mRS scores between the two groups (mRS score =0-1, OR = 1.20, 95% CI: 0.99~1.46, z = 1.82, p = 0.07; mRS score =0-2, OR = 1.17, 95% CI: 0.94~1.45, z = 1.38, p = 0.17). However, the subgroup analysis showed that the 90-day mRS score of the 0.25 mg/kg tenecteplase group was significantly different from that of groups treated with other doses of tenecteplase (OR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.01~2.03, z = 2.03, p = 0.04). (2) Safety: The incidences of any intracranial hemorrhage (OR = 0.91, 95% Ci: 0.55~1.49, z = 0.39, p = 0.70), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.63~2.32, z = 0.56 P = 0.57), and mortality (OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.57~1.26, z = 0.82, p = 0.41) were not significantly different between the tenecteplase and alteplase groups. Conclusions: Tenecteplase can significantly increase the 24-hour vascular recanalization rate and improve the neurological prognosis of patients with acute ischemic stroke and it does not increase the risk of intracranial hemorrhage or mortality.

scholarly journals Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in Patients on Oral Anticoagulants

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (6) ◽  
pp. 1781-1789 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert-Jan B. Goldhoorn ◽  
Rob A. van de Graaf ◽  
Jan M. van Rees ◽  
Hester F. Lingsma ◽  
Diederik W.J. Dippel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Common Odds Ratio ◽  
Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage

Background and Purpose— The use of oral anticoagulants (OAC) is considered a contra-indication for intravenous thrombolytics as acute treatment of ischemic stroke. However, little is known about the risks and benefits of endovascular treatment in patients on prior OAC. We aim to compare outcomes after endovascular treatment between patients with and without prior use of OAC. Methods— Data of patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by an intracranial anterior circulation occlusion, included in the nationwide, prospective, MR CLEAN Registry between March 2014 and November 2017, were analyzed. Outcomes of interest included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and functional outcome at 90 days (modified Rankin Scale score). Outcomes between groups were compared with (ordinal) logistic regression analyses, adjusted for prognostic factors. Results— Three thousand one hundred sixty-two patients were included in this study, of whom 502 (16%) used OAC. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage between patients with and without prior OACs (5% versus 6%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.38–1.06]). Patients on OACs had worse functional outcomes than patients without OACs (common odds ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.47–0.66]). However, this observed difference in functional outcome disappeared after adjustment for prognostic factors (adjusted common odds ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.74–1.13]). Conclusions— Prior OAC use in patients treated with endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke is not associated with an increased risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage or worse functional outcome compared with no prior OAC use. Therefore, prior OAC use should not be a contra-indication for endovascular treatment.

Periprocedural complications of second-generation flow diverter treatment using Pipeline Flex for unruptured intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 817-824 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kartik Dev Bhatia ◽  
Hans Kortman ◽  
Emanuele Orru ◽  
Jesse M Klostranec ◽  
Vitor M Pereira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Intracranial Aneurysms ◽  
Second Generation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Major Complication ◽  
Flow Diverter ◽  
Major Complications ◽  
Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms ◽  
Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage

BackgroundFlow diverters are a breakthrough treatment for large and giant intracranial aneurysms but carry a risk of periprocedural death or major stroke. Pipeline Flex is a second-generation device that is thought to have lower complication rates because of improvements in the delivery system as well as increased operator experience. Our objective was to analyze the risk of periprocedural death or major complications using Pipeline Flex for unruptured intracranial aneurysms.MethodsA systematic search of three databases was performed for studies of ≥10 treatments using Pipeline Flex for unruptured intracranial aneurysms (2014–2019) using PRISMA guidelines. Random effects meta-analysis was used to pool the rates of periprocedural (<30 days) death, major ischemic stroke, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and minor stroke/transient ischemic attack.ResultsWe included eight studies reporting 901 treatments in 879 patients. Periprocedural mortality (<30 days) was 0.8% (5/901; 95% CI 0.4% to 1.5%; I2=0%). Rate of major complications (death, major ischemic stroke, or symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage) was 1.8% (14/901; 95% CI 1.0% to 2.7%; I2=0%). Aneurysm size ≥10 mm was a statistically significant predictor of a major complication (OR 6.4; 95% CI 2.0 to 20.7; p=0.002). Risk of a major complication in aneurysms <10 mm was 0.9% (95% CI 0.3% to 1.7%; I2=0%). The meta-analysis was limited by the predominance of anterior circulation aneurysms.ConclusionTreatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms using the Pipeline Flex flow diverter has a low periprocedural risk of death (0.8%) or major complication (1.8%). The risk of a major complication is significantly higher for large/giant aneurysms (4.4%) and is very low for aneurysms <10 mm (0.9%).

Abstract P532: Does Atrial Fibrillation Impact Rate of Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated With rt-PA and/or Endovascular Treatment?

Stroke ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Reza Bavarsad Shahripour ◽  
Benjamin Shifflett ◽  
Edward Labin ◽  
Morgan Figurelle ◽  
Anna Barminova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Intravenous Thrombolysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Chi Squared ◽  
Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage

Background: Patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to atrial fibrillation (afib) may have increased complications from intravenous thrombolysis or endovascular treatment (ET) compared to other stroke subtypes. The purpose of this study was to compare the rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) in patients with and without a history of a fib treated with IV rt-PA and/or ET. Methods: Consecutive stroke code activations were retrospectively analyzed from January 2004-June 2020 at an academic comprehensive stroke center. Patients were included if they were treated with IV rt-PA and/or ET within 24 hours of stroke onset. Patients were stratified into the six groups:1-No hx of a fib with ET only, 2-Hx of a fib with ET only, 3-No hx of a fib with IV rt-PA plus ET, 4-Hx of a fib with IV rt-PA plus ET, 5-No hx of a fib with IV rt-PA only, 6-Hx of a fib with IV rt-PA only. Primary outcome was defined as any sICH within 72 hours of treatment using the NINDS definition. Baseline demographics were compared. Chi squared was used to assess differences in sICH rates and logistic regression to compare individual groups. Analyses were both unadjusted and adjusted for baseline NIHSS, age, sex, baseline blood pressure, pre-stroke mRS, smoking status, and baseline glucose. Results: We identified 720 AIS patients who received acute treatment (IV rt-PA: n=578; ET: n=100; IV rt-PA+ET:n=18). There was a significant difference in sex (p=0.005); Hispanic ethnicity (p=0.002); current smoking (p=<0.001); current alcohol use (p=0.03), CHF (p=0.01); and age (p<0.0001) between groups. Baseline NIHSS was significantly higher in Group 4 (23, SD 8, p=<0.001).In adjusted analysis, there was no significant difference in sICH in patients with a fib after receiving IVtPA (OR 1.53, CI 0.47-4.99, p=0.48), ET (OR 0.93 , CI 0-∞, p=1.00), or both (OR 0.25,CI 0.00-9.07, p=0.45) compared to those without afib. There was no significant difference in sICH in adjusted analyses in patients with and without a fib overall (OR 0.93, CI 0-∞, p=1.00). Conclusion: In this study, atrial fibrillation did not have a significant impact on rates of sICH in AIS patients treated with IV rt-PA, ET, or both. This study supports the safety of IV rt-PA, ET, and combination therapy in the atrial fibrillation population.

Abstract W MP28: Safety of Parentral Antiplatelet Regimen Within 24 Hours of Intravenous tPA Administration: Challenging the Conventional Paradigm

Stroke ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Javaad Ahmad ◽  
Mohammed Hussain ◽  
Siddhart Mehta ◽  
Jaskiran Brar ◽  
Harina Chahal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Major Complication ◽  
Favorable Outcome ◽  
Full Dose ◽  
Group A ◽  
Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Group B ◽  
Iv Tpa

Background and Objective: It is considered unconventional to initiate antiplatelet regimen within 24 hours of IV tPa administration in acute ischemic strokes. There has been an increasing amount of literature assessing combination therapy of IV r- tPA and IV Eptifibatide in acute ischemic stroke. Our objectives were to evaluate the safety (hemorrhagic complications) and efficacy (discharge mRS) of administering IV Eptifibatide within the first 24 hours of receiving full dose IV r-tPA respectively. Materials and Methods: All patients that presented to our university affiliated stroke center from 2010-13 with an acute ischemic stroke were included and retrospectively classified into two groups. Group A underwent full dose IV r- tPa (.9 mg/kg) (+/- Endovascular intervention). Group B underwent full dose IV r-tPa (.9mg/kg) and IV Eptifibatide (+/- Endovascular intervention). Epitafibide was administered as a bolus of 135 mcg/kg IV followed by .5 mcg/kg/min for 20 hours. The primary endpoint of bleeding is classified as major (symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage or hemoglobin decrease by >5 mg/dl), minor (asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhage or hemoglobin decrease by 3-5 mg/dl) and insignificant as proposed by TIMI score. The efficacy endpoint was discharge mRS of 0-1 as favorable, with 2 and above being unfavorable. Results: We reviewed 2,016 patients with ischemic stroke, of which 170 received IV tPA. Among the group, 118 received IV r-tPa alone and 52 received combined modalities of IV r-tPa and IV Eptifibatide. In group A, there were 7 patients who had a major complication of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, while 1 patient had a minor complication of asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. In group B, there were 3 patients who had major complication of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and 5 with minor complications of asymptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. In group A , 9% (n=4) had a favorable outcome (OR=2.389, 95% CI 0.6645 to 8.589, p= 0.2217). Of the 52 patients in group B, 18% (n=8) had a favorable outcome. Conclusion: IV Eptifibatide, within the first 24 hours of ischemic stroke in combination with full dose IV r-tPA was found to be safe and efficacious. Further, larger prospective trials are needed to corroborate our findings.

Efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment in acute ischemic stroke due to cervical artery dissection: A 15-year consecutive case series

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 381-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Bernardo ◽  
Stefania Nannoni ◽  
Davide Strambo ◽  
Francesco Puccinelli ◽  
Guillaume Saliou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Endovascular Treatment ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Intravenous Thrombolysis ◽  
Artery Dissection ◽  
Cervical Artery Dissection ◽  
Cervical Artery ◽  
Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Favorable Clinical Outcome

Background Limited observational data are available on endovascular treatment in acute ischemic stroke due to cervical artery dissection. Three studies comparing endovascular treatment with standard medical therapy or intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection-related acute ischemic stroke did not demonstrate superiority of endovascular treatment. Efficacy and the choice of endovascular treatment technique in this setting remain to be established. Aims To assess the potential efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment compared to intravenous thrombolysis alone or to no revascularization treatment in our center. Methods We selected all consecutive patients with cervical artery dissection-related acute ischemic stroke and intracranial occlusion from the Acute STroke Registry and Analysis of Lausanne between 2003 and 2017. We compared clinical and neuroimaging data of patients treated by endovascular treatment versus patients receiving intravenous thrombolysis or patients without revascularization treatment. Safety analysis included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, major radiological hemorrhages (parenchymal hematoma 1, parenchymal hematoma 2, and subarachnoid hemorrhage) and mortality within seven days. We assessed favorable clinical outcome (modified Rankin Scale 0-2) at three months using a binary logistic regression model. Results Of the 109 patients included, 24 had endovascular treatment, 38 received intravenous thrombolysis alone, and 47 had no revascularization treatment. Endovascular treatment patients had a higher rate of recanalization at 24 h. Major radiological hemorrhages occurred more often in endovascular treatment patients (all with bridging therapy) than in patients without revascularization treatment (p = 0.026), with no differences in symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage or mortality within seven days. Favorable clinical outcome at three months did not differ between groups (endovascular treatment versus intravenous thrombolysis p = 0.407; endovascular treatment versus no revascularization treatment p = 0.580). Conclusions In this single-center cohort of cervical artery dissection-related acute ischemic stroke with intracranial occlusion, endovascular treatment with prior intravenous thrombolysis may increase the risk of major radiological but not symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Despite the lack of clear superiority in our cohort, endovascular treatment should currently not be withheld in these patients.

Mothership versus drip and ship for thrombectomy in patients who had an acute stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Ismail ◽  
Xavier Armoiry ◽  
Noam Tau ◽  
François Zhu ◽  
Udi Sadeh-Gonik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Relative Risk ◽  
Acute Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Functional Independence ◽  
Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Comprehensive Stroke Center ◽  
Stroke Center

BackgroundThe effectiveness of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion is time-dependent. While only stroke centers with endovascular capabilities perform MT, many patients who had a stroke initially present to the closest primary stroke centers capable of administering earlier intravenous thrombolysis, and then require to be transferred to a comprehensive stroke center for MT.PurposeTo compare the outcomes of this care pathway (drip and ship (DS)) with that whereby patients are directly transferred to a comprehensive stroke center (mothership (MS)).MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies using several electronic databases to determine whether successful reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction ≥2b), functional independence at 90 days (modified Rankin Scale score ≤2), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and 90-day mortality differed between those who underwent MT with the DS or the MS treatment pathway. Outcomes were meta-analyzed and the results expressed as adjusted relative risk (aRR) for the primary analysis and unadjusted relative risk (uRR) for secondary analysis.ResultsEight studies including 2068 patients were selected, including one study reporting results fully adjusted for baseline characteristics. Patients undergoing MS had better functional independence than those undergoing DS (uRR=0.87, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.93; aRR=0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.98). No difference was found between the treatment pathways in successful reperfusion (uRR=1.05, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.15; aRR=1.00, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.10), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (uRR=1.37, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.06; aRR, 1.53, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.98), and 90-day mortality (uRR=1.00, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.19; aRR=1.21, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.64).ConclusionsPatients who had an acute ischemic stroke admitted directly to a comprehensive stroke center (MS patients) with endovascular capacities may have better 90-day outcomes than those receiving DS treatment. However, major limitations of current evidence (ie, retrospective studies and selection bias) suggest a need for adequately powered studies. Multicenter randomized controlled trials are expected to answer this question.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document