Rescue stenting for acute ischemic stroke with Refractory Emergent Large vessel occlusion in the modern thrombectomy era

Hypoperfusion Intensity Ratio Less Than 0.4 Is Associated with Favorable Outcomes in Unsuccessfully Reperfused Acute Ischemic Stroke with Large-Vessel Occlusion

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Endovascular thrombectomy is a standard treatment for acute ischemic stroke due to large-vessel occlusions (AIS-LVO), but a large minority of patients do not achieve successful reperfusion. This study aimed to investigate the hypoperfusion intensity ratio (HIR) as a prognostic biomarker in unsuccessfully reperfused patients with AIS-LVO.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted at 2 comprehensive stroke centers, involving patients with AIS-LVO who underwent endovascular thrombectomy but did not achieve successful reperfusion, defined as a modified TICI score of 0-2a. HIR, derived from CT or MR perfusion imaging, was analyzed for its association with favorable clinical outcomes (90-day mRs score of 0-2). The optimal HIR threshold predictive of favorable outcomes was identified through receiver operating curve analysis.

RESULTS

Of 129 patients included, 20 (15.5%) achieved favorable outcomes. HIR of <0.4 significantly predicted favorable outcomes with a sensitivity of 66% and specificity of 80%. Patients with an HIR of <0.4 demonstrated better clinical and imaging profiles, including lower admission NIHSS scores and smaller ischemic core volumes. Multivariable logistic regression confirmed HIR, along with age and the presence of hemorrhagic transformation, as independent predictors of favorable outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

In unsuccessfully reperfused patients with AIS-LVO, an HIR of <0.4 is associated with favorable outcomes, emphasizing on the importance of robust collateral circulation. This finding suggests that perfusion imaging and HIR evaluation could guide clinical decision-making and prognostication in this challenging patient subset.

Intracranial atherosclerosis update for neurointerventionalists

The management of intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) has been evolving with advanced imaging, refinements of best medical treatment, and the development of endovascular options. There has been a significant increase in the use of endovascular therapy for symptomatic ICAD in the USA over the past 6 years. The rationale for this review is to update neurointerventionalists in these areas so that evidence-based decisions can be considered when counseling potential patients regarding their risks, benefits, and potential complications. The landmark SAMMPRIS trial demonstrated superiority of aggressive medical management (AMM) over intracranial stenting as an initial treatment. However, the risk of disabling or fatal stroke remains high in patients presenting with stroke treated with AMM. Recent studies showed a significantly lower rate of periprocedural complications from intracranial stenting. Patients who have failed medical treatment may therefore benefit from intracranial stenting, particularly in those with hemodynamic compromise and large vessel embolic stroke. Drug coated angioplasty balloons and drug eluting stents may potentially reduce the risk of in-stent re-stenosis. Large vessel occlusion (LVO) due to underlying ICAD is seen in a subset of thrombectomy-eligible patients. The use of stenting as a rescue therapy in LVO thrombectomy has also shown promising early results.

Rescue intracranial permanent stenting for refractory occlusion following thrombectomy: a propensity matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Rescue intracranial stenting (RIS) can be used in refractory large vessel occlusion (LVO) after mechanical thrombectomy (MT). We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of RIS versus a propensity matched sample of patients with persistent LVO.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed a multicenter retrospective pooled cohort of patients with anterior LVO (2015-2021) treated with MT, and identified patients with at least three passes and a modified Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) score of 0 to 2a. Propensity score matching was used to account for determinants of outcome in patients with or without RIS. The study outcomes included 3 months modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and symptomatic hemorrhagic transformation (HT).

RESULTS

420 patients with a refractory anterior occlusion were included, of which 101 were treated with RIS (mean age 69 years). Favorable outcome (mRS 0-2) was more frequent in patients with a patent stent at day 1 (53% vs 6%, P<0.001), which was independently associated with an early dual antiplatelet regimen (P<0.05). In the propensity matched sample, patients treated with RIS versus without RIS had similar rates of favorable outcomes (36.8% vs 30.3%, P=0.606). Patients with RIS showed a favorable shift in the overall mRS distributions (common adjusted OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.91, P=0.006). Symptomatic HT was marginally more frequent in the RIS group (9% vs 3%, P=0.07), and there was no difference in 3-month mortality.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients with a refractory intracranial occlusion despite at least three thrombectomy passes, RIS may be associated with an overall shift towards more favorable clinical outcome, and no significant increase in the odds of symptomatic HT or death.

The Enterprise stent…still useful after all these years

BACKGROUND

The Enterprise stent (Codman Neuro, Massachusetts, USA) received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 2007 for stent-assisted coiling (SAC). Since its introduction, newer stents and devices for aneurysm treatment have been developed resulting in a shift in the utilization of this stent from SAC to other off-label indications.

OBJECTIVE

To describe our experience with the Enterprise stent being used for SAC and other off-label indications.

METHODS

This is a multi-center retrospective review of the use of the Enterprise stent between 2018 and 2023. All patients in which the Enterprise stent was successfully deployed were included in the study.

RESULTS

Our study cohort comprised of 194 patients, mostly females (n = 112, 57.7%), with a mean age of 63.2 years ± 14.3. The Enterprise stent was used for SAC in only 24 (12.4%) patients and was used for rescue stenting in stroke in 101 patients (52.1%), treatment of intracranial stenosis in 53 patients (27.3%), treatment of in-stent stenosis in 1 patient (0.5%), and for treatment of dissections in 15 patients (7.7%). From 2018 to 2023, the use of Enterprise stents for SAC significantly decreased (p < 0.0001) while the use of Enterprise stents for non-SAC purposes was insignificantly variable (p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that the Enterprise stent remains a reliable tool in neuroendovascular procedures, even if its original intended use has been supplanted by other devices.

Rescue Stent Placement for Acute Ischemic Stroke with Large Vessel Occlusion Refractory to Mechanical Thrombectomy: A Multiethnic Middle Eastern/African/Asian Cohort

PURPOSE

To investigate the safety and effectiveness of rescue stent placement in patients who experienced acute stroke in whom mechanical thrombectomy failed.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of a multiethnic stroke database. After stent placement, an aggressive antiplatelet protocol was followed with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa infusion. The primary outcomes were incidence of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), recanalization score, and favorable prognosis (modified Rankin score ≤ 2) at 90 days. A comparison was made between patients from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region and those from other regions.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients were included, with 87% being men. The mean age was 51.3 years (SD ±11.8); 32 patients (58%) were from South Asia, 12 (22%) from MENA, 9 (16%) from Southeast Asia, and 2 (4%) from elsewhere. Successful recanalization (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score = 2b/3) was achieved in 43 patients (78%), and symptomatic ICH occurred in 2 patients (4%). A favorable outcome at 90 days was seen in 26 of the 55 patients (47%). Apart from significantly older age-mean, 62.8 years (SD ±13; median, 69 years) versus 48.1 years (SD ±9.3; median, 49 years)-and coronary artery disease burden-4 (33%) versus 1 (2%) (P < .05), patients from MENA had risk factors, stroke severity, recanalization rates, ICH rates, and 90-day outcomes similar to those from South and Southeast Asia.

CONCLUSION

Rescue stent placement showed good outcomes and a low risk of clinically significant bleeding in a multiethnic cohort of patients from MENA and South and Southeast Asia, similar to that in published literature.

The Safety and Efficacy of Emergency Stenting during Bridging Therapy: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of emergency stenting for patients with ischemic stroke treated with bridging therapy.

METHODS

Patients with onset of stroke who underwent bridging therapy were included in the two groups with emergency stenting (ESG) and without stenting (NSG). To avoid the bias due to confounding variables, subjects were further assigned in two groups using 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). The safety outcomes include the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), parenchymal hemorrhage type 2 (PH2), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), fatal hemorrhage, and mortality. The efficacy outcomes include successful recanalization, 3-month favorable outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS]: 0-2).

RESULTS

175 patients treated with bridging therapy were included in this study, with 52 patients in the ES group and 123 patients in the groups without ES, and with 30 patients in each group after PSM. No significant differences in the incidences of ICH, PH2, sICH, fatal hemorrhage, and mortality were found between the two groups with ES and without ES before and after PSM (p > 0.05 for all groups). The analysis without PSM showed that the group with ES had a higher rate of successful recanalization (98.1 vs. 88.6%, p = 0.041) than the group without ES, but no significant difference was seen (96.6 vs. 93.3%, p = 0.554) between the two groups after PSM. There was no difference in favorable outcome between the two groups before and after matching as well (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

It is safe and effective for patients with onset of ischemic stroke to receive emergency stenting during bridging therapy, without increasing the risk of hemorrhagic transformation and mortality.

Comparison of Safety and Efficacy after Emergency Stenting in Patients Exhibiting Intracranial Atherosclerotic Stenosis Associated with Large-vessel Occlusion with and without Intravenous Infusion of Tirofiban

PURPOSE

Intracranial rescue stent angioplasty is a bailout strategy for acute stroke patients in cases of unsuccessful endovascular thrombectomy due to underlying atherosclerotic stenosis. However, there is no consensus on a preprocedural and intraprocedural antiplatelet regimen. The aim of this single-centre study was to compare the safety and efficacy of emergency stenting in patients exhibiting intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis-related acute large-vessel occlusion with or without peri-interventional intravenous infusion of tirofiban.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 78 patients who were treated with rescuestent angioplasty between 2010 and 2019 due to acute ischaemic stroke. The patients were divided into 2 groups: those who received peri-interventional intravenous tirofiban and those who did not receive tirofiban. We compared clinical safety and functional outcomes in both treatment groups with symptomatic haemorrhage as the primary endpoint. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression was performed to investigate the association between tirofiban and outcome measures.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients were treated with intravenous tirofiban (47.4%), and 41 patients did not receive intravenous tirofiban (52.6%). Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of symptomatic haemorrhage (16.2% in the tirofiban group versus 14.6% in the control group, p = 0.847). The 3-month mortality (21.6% in the tirofiban group versus 17.1% in the control group, p = 0.611) and good functional outcomes according to the modified Rankin scale (45.9% versus 34.1%, p = 0.289) were comparable.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study suggest that the application of tirofiban for rescue stenting after failed mechanical thrombectomy is safe.