Aspirin versus aggressive antiplatelet therapy for acute carotid stenting plus thrombectomy in tandem occlusions: ETIS Registry results

Efficacy and Safety Outcomes for Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated with Intravenous Infusion of Tirofiban After Emergent Carotid Artery Stenting

INTRODUCTION

Emergent stenting of the extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) in stroke patients requires antiplatelet therapy to prevent in-stent thrombosis with a higher risk of intracranial haemorrhage.

AIM OF THE STUDY

Assess the efficacy and safety of emergent carotid stenting with intravenous tirofiban in acute ischemic stroke patients.

METHODS

Primary endpoint: symptomatic hemorrhage. Secondary endpoints: 90-day functional outcome and mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 62 patients, 21 (34%) received tirofiban as a single antiplatelet, and 41 (66%) received combined therapy. Premedication with anticoagulants and antiplatelets was significantly more frequent in the tirofiban-only group. The rate of symptomatic haemorrhage was significantly lower in the tirofiban-only group than in the combined group (4.8% vs. 27%, p = 0.046). The patients with tirofiban alone had a significantly better functional outcome at day 90 than the combined group (52% vs. 24%, p = 0.028). Mortality was equal (24%) in both groups. Pre-interventional NIHSS score (p = 0.003), significant blood pressure fluctuations (p = 0.012), tandem occlusion (p = 0.023), and thrombolysis (p = 0.044) showed relevant influence on the rate of symptomatic hemorrhage in the entire patient cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

A single antiplatelet therapy with tirofiban regardless of the premedication may improve the functional outcome in patients with stroke due to acute extracranial carotid lesion and emergent carotid stenting with lower rates of serious intracranial haemorrhage. For patients with high pre-interventional NIHSS score, tandem occlusion and after pre-interventional thrombolysis, caution is advised. Additionally, strict blood pressure monitoring should be conducted during the first 72 h after intervention.

Intravenous thrombolysis with tenecteplase versus alteplase combined with endovascular treatment of anterior circulation tandem occlusions: A pooled analysis of ETIS and TETRIS

BACKGROUND

Tandem occlusions are a singular large vessel occlusion entity involving specific endovascular and perioperative antithrombotic management. In this context, data on safety and efficacy of prior intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with tenecteplase is scarce. We aimed to compare IVT with tenecteplase or alteplase in patients with acute tandem occlusions intended for endovascular treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective pooled analysis of two large observational registries (ETIS (Endovascular Treatment of Ischemic Stroke) and TETRIS (Tenecteplase Treatment in Ischemic Stroke)) was performed on consecutive patients presenting with anterior circulation tandem occlusion treated with IVT using either alteplase (ETIS) or tenecteplase (TETRIS) followed by endovascular treatment between January 2015 and June 2022. Sensitivity analyses on atherosclerosis related tandem occlusions and on patient treated with emergent carotid stenting were conducted. Propensity score overlap weighting analyses were performed.

RESULTS

We analyzed 753 patients: 124 in the tenecteplase and 629 in the alteplase group. The overall odds of favorable outcome (3-month modified Rankin score 0-2) were comparable between both groups (49.4% vs 47.1%; OR = 1.10, 95%CI 0.85-1.41). Early recanalization, final successful recanalization and mortality favored the use of tenecteplase. The occurrence of any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) was more frequent after tenecteplase use (OR = 2.24; 95%CI 1.75-2.86). However, risks of symptomatic ICH and parenchymal hematoma remained similar. In atherosclerotic tandems, favorable outcome, mortality, parenchymal hematoma, early recanalization, and final successful recanalization favored the tenecteplase group. In the carotid stenting subgroup, PH were less frequent in the tenecteplase group (OR = 0.18; 95%CI 0.05-0.69).

CONCLUSION

In patients with tandem occlusions, IVT with tenecteplase seemed reasonably safe in particular with increased early recanalization rates. These findings remain preliminary and should be further confirmed in randomized trials.

Antithrombotic regimen in emergent carotid stenting for acute ischemic stroke due to tandem occlusion: a meta-analysis of aggregate data

BACKGROUND

The periprocedural antithrombotic regimen might affect the risk-benefit profile of emergent carotid artery stenting (eCAS) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to tandem lesions, especially after intravenous thrombolysis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of antithrombotics following eCAS.

METHODS

We followed PRISMA guidelines and searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus from January 1, 2004 to November 30, 2022 for studies evaluating eCAS in tandem occlusion. The primary endpoint was 90-day good functional outcome. Secondary outcomes were symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, in-stent thrombosis, delayed stent thrombosis, and successful recanalization. Meta-analysis of proportions and meta-analysis of odds ratios were implemented.

RESULTS

34 studies with 1658 patients were included. We found that the use of no antiplatelets (noAPT), single antiplatelet (SAPT), dual antiplatelets (DAPT), or glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) yielded similar rates of good functional outcomes, with a marginal benefit of GPI over SAPT (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.35, Pheterogeneity=0.31). Sensitivity analysis and meta-regression excluded a significant impact of intravenous thrombolysis and Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS). We observed no increase in symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) with DAPT or GPI compared with noAPT or SAPT. We also found similar rates of delayed stent thrombosis across groups, with acute in-stent thrombosis showing marginal, non-significant benefits from GPI and DAPT over SAPT and noAPT.

CONCLUSIONS

In AIS due to tandem occlusion, the periprocedural antithrombotic regimen of eCAS seems to have a marginal effect on good functional outcome. Overall, high intensity antithrombotic therapy may provide a marginal benefit on good functional outcome and carotid stent patency without a significant increase in risk of sICH.

Predictors of Good Clinical Outcome After Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke due to Tandem Lesion in Anterior Circulation: Results from the ASCENT Study

PURPOSE

Endovascular treatment (EVT) of tandem lesion (TL) in anterior circulation (AC) acute ischemic stroke (AIS) represents still a clinical challenge. We aimed to evaluate selected factors related to EVT and assess other possible predictors of good clinical outcome besides the generally known ones.

METHODS

AIS patients with TL in AC treated with EVT were enrolled in the multicenter retrospective ASCENT study. A good three-month clinical outcome was scored as 0-2 points in modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and achieved recanalization using the TICI scale. Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH) was assessed using the SITS-MOST criteria. Logistic regression analysis was used for the assessment of possible predictors of mRS 0-2 with adjustment for potential confounders.

RESULTS

In total, 300 (68.7% males, mean age 67.3 ± 10.2 years) patients with median of admission NIHSS 17 were analyzed. Recanalization (TICI 2b-3) was achieved in 290 (96.7%) patients and 176 (58.7%) had mRS 0-2. Besides the age, admission NIHSS and SICH, admission glycemia (p = 0.005, OR: 0.884) the stent patency within the first 30 days after EVT (p = 0.0003, OR: 0.219), dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) started within 12 h after EVT (p < 0.0001, OR: 5.006) and statin therapy started within 24 h after stenting (p < 0.0001, OR: 5.558) were found as other predictors.

CONCLUSION

Admission glycemia, start of DAPT within 12 h and statin therapy within 24 h after EVT, and stent patency within the first 30 days after EVT were found as other predictors of good three-month clinical outcome in AIS patients treated with EVT for TL.

Comparison of three antithrombotic strategies for emergent carotid stenting during stroke thrombectomy: a multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Periprocedural antithrombotic treatment is a key determinant for the risk-benefit balance of emergent carotid artery stenting (eCAS) during stroke thrombectomy. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of three types of antithrombotic treatment.

METHODS

Retrospective review of prospectively collected endovascular databases in four comprehensive stroke centers, including consecutive cases of eCAS for tandem lesion strokes between January 2019 and July 2021. During this period, each center prospectively applied one of three periprocedural protocols: (a) two centers administered aspirin (250 mg IV); (b) one center administered aspirin and heparin (bolus+24 hours infusion); and (c) one center applied an aggressive antiplatelet strategy consisting of aspirin and clopidogrel (loading doses), with added intravenous tirofiban if in-stent thrombosis was observed during thrombectomy. Dichotomized comparisons of outcomes were performed between aggressive versus non-aggressive strategy (aspirin±heparin) and aspirin+heparin versus aspirin-alone groups.

RESULTS

Among 161 included patients, 62 received aspirin monotherapy, 38 aspirin+heparin, and 61 an aggressive treatment. Aggressive antiplatelet treatment was associated with an increased rate of excellent (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) 2c-3) recanalization and reduced carotid stent thrombosis at day 1 (3.5% vs 16.3%), compared with non-aggressive strategy. There were no significant differences in hemorrhagic transformation or 90-day mortality. There was a tendency towards better clinical outcome with aggressive treatment, without reaching statistical significance. Addition of heparin to aspirin was not associated with an increased rate of carotid stent patency.

CONCLUSIONS

Aggressive antiplatelet treatment was associated with improved intracranial recanalization and carotid stent patency, without safety concerns. These findings have implications for randomized trials and may be of utility for clinicians when making antithrombotic treatment choices.

Low dose intravenous cangrelor versus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in endovascular treatment of tandem lesions

OBJECTIVES

Intravenous (IV) periprocedural antiplatelet therapy (APT) for patients undergoing acute carotid stenting during mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is not fully investigated. We aimed to compare the safety profile of IV low dose cangrelor versus IV glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (GP-IIb/IIIa) inhibitors in patients with acute tandem lesions (TLs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively identified all cases of periprocedural administration of IV cangrelor or GP-IIb/IIIa inhibitors during acute TLs intervention from a multicenter collaboration. Patients were divided in two groups according to the IV APT regimen at the time of MT procedure: 1) cangrelor and 2) GP-IIb/IIIa inhibitors (tirofiban and eptifibatide). Safety outcomes included rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), parenchymal hematoma type 1 and 2 (PH1-PH2), and hemorrhagic infarction type 1 and 2 (HI1-HI2).

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients received IV APT during MT, 30 were in the cangrelor group, and 33 were in the GP-IIb/IIIa inhibitors group. There were no significant differences in the rates of sICH (3.3% vs. 12.1%, aOR=0.21, 95%CI 0.02-2.18, p=0.229), HI1-HI2 (21.4% vs 42.4%, aOR=0.21, 95%CI 0.02-2.18, p=0.229), and PH1-PH2 (17.9% vs. 12.1%, aOR=1.63, 95%CI 0.29-9.83, p=0.577) between both treatment groups. However, there was a trend toward reduced hemorrhage rates with cangrelor. Cangrelor was associated with increased odds of complete reperfusion (aOR=5.86; 95%CI 1.57-26.62;p=0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective non-randomized cohort study, our findings suggest that low dose cangrelor has similar safety and increased rate of complete reperfusion compared to IV GP-IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm this association.

Safety Outcomes of Antiplatelet Therapy During Endovascular Treatment of Tandem Lesions in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients

Risk of hemorrhage remains with antiplatelet medications required with carotid stenting during endovascular therapy (EVT) for tandem lesion (TLs). We evaluated the safety of antiplatelet regimens in EVT of TLs. This multicenter study included anterior circulation TL patients from 2015 to 2020, stratified by periprocedural EVT antiplatelet strategy: (1) no antiplatelets, (2) single oral, (3) dual oral, and (4) intravenous IV (in combination with single or dual oral). Primary outcome was symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Secondary outcomes were any hemorrhage, favorable functional status (mRS 0-2) at 90 days, successful reperfusion (mTICI score ≥ 2b), in-stent thrombosis, and mortality at 90 days. Of the total 691 patients, 595 were included in the final analysis. One hundred and nineteen (20%) received no antiplatelets, 134 (22.5%) received single oral, 152 (25.5%) dual oral, and 196 (31.9%) IV combination. No significant association was found for sICH (ref: no antiplatelet: 5.7%; single:4.2%; aOR 0.64, CI 0.20-2.06, p = 0.45, dual:1.9%; aOR 0.35, CI 0.09-1.43, p = 0.15, IV combination: 6.1%; aOR 1.05, CI 0.39-2.85, p = 0.92). No association was found for parenchymal or petechial hemorrhage. Odds of successful reperfusion were significantly higher with dual oral (aOR 5.85, CI 2.12-16.14, p = 0.001) and IV combination (aOR 2.35, CI 1.07-5.18, p = 0.035) compared with no antiplatelets. Odds of excellent reperfusion (mTICI 2c/3) were significantly higher for cangrelor (aOR 4.41; CI 1.2-16.28; p = 0.026). No differences were noted for mRS 0-2 at 90 days, in-stent thrombosis, and mortality rates. Administration of dual oral and IV (in combination with single or dual oral) antiplatelets during EVT was associated with significantly increased odds of successful reperfusion without an increased rate of symptomatic hemorrhage or mortality in patients with anterior circulation TLs.

Elective carotid stenting fulfills quality standards defined in guidelines

PURPOSE

 According to evidence from randomized trials and current guidelines, elective carotid artery stenting (CAS) is still considered second-line therapy compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA). However, the publication of randomized comparative trials for patients with symptomatic stenoses occurred well over 10 years ago. In view of problems regarding German quality assurance when differentiating elective from emergency interventions and low case numbers for CAS indications, it seemed reasonable to present neurologically controlled CAS results and to investigate whether elective CAS consistently fulfills the strict quality criteria and what differences exist with respect to emergency CAS interventions in acute ischemic stroke.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 Between 01/2012 and 07/2022, 141 elective CAS procedures were performed to treat patients with symptomatic (n = 123) and asymptomatic (n = 18) stenoses. Protection by a filter system was achieved in 134 of these elective procedures (95 %). During the same period, 158 patients underwent carotid stenting for acute stroke. Complication rates were determined using neurologically controlled data. CAS-related complications (stent thrombosis, stent-associated vascular damage, thromboembolism, and symptomatic hemorrhage) were extracted from emergency interventions, and clinical outcome (NIHSS progression) was determined during the inpatient stay.

RESULTS

 The rate of stroke and death determined during the inpatient stay for elective symptomatic patients was 0.8 %. Early treatment within the first 7 days after the index event, age > 70 years, and operator experience were not significant risk factors for the occurrence of complications. No complications were observed after CAS of asymptomatic stenoses. The procedure-related complication rate for emergency procedures was 7.8 %, which was significantly higher than after elective CAS, as expected (p < 0.006).

CONCLUSION

 Even with limited indications and limited case numbers, compliance with the strict quality criteria of the current S3 Guideline 2022 for elective CAS interventions is possible for both symptomatic and asymptomatic stenoses in an experienced center. Emergency CAS interventions have significantly higher complication rates under other conditions and must be considered separately with regard to quality assurance.

KEY POINTS

· Elective carotid stenting fulfills the strict quality criteria of the current S3 guideline 2022.. · Emergency carotid stenting has significantly higher complication rates than elective procedures.. · Elective and emergency carotid stenting cannot be meaningfully compared..

CITATION FORMAT

· Keil F, Stahn S, Reitz SC et al. Elective carotid stenting fulfills quality standards defined in guidelines. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2023; DOI: 10.1055/a-2175-4029.

Antiplatelets and antithrombotics in neurointerventional procedures: Guideline update

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet and antithrombotic medication management before, during, and after neurointerventional procedures has significant practice variation. This document updates and builds upon the 2014 Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery (SNIS) Guideline 'Platelet function inhibitor and platelet function testing in neurointerventional procedures', providing updates based on the treatment of specific pathologies and for patients with specific comorbidities.

METHODS

We performed a structured literature review of studies that have become available since the 2014 SNIS Guideline. We graded the quality of the evidence. Recommendations were arrived at through a consensus conference of the authors, then with additional input from the full SNIS Standards and Guidelines Committee and the SNIS Board of Directors.

RESULTS

The management of antiplatelet and antithrombotic agents before, during, and after endovascular neurointerventional procedures continues to evolve. The following recommendations were agreed on. (1) It is reasonable to resume anticoagulation after a neurointerventional procedure or major bleeding episode as soon as the thrombotic risk exceeds the bleeding risk in an individual patient (Class I, Level C-EO). (2) Platelet testing can be useful to guide local practice, and specific approaches to using the numbers demonstrate marked local variability (Class IIa, Level B-NR). (3) For patients without comorbidities undergoing brain aneurysm treatment, there are no additional considerations for medication choice beyond the thrombotic risks of the catheterization procedure and aneurysm treatment devices (Class IIa, Level B-NR). (4) For patients undergoing neurointerventional brain aneurysm treatment who have had cardiac stents placed within the last 6-12 months, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is recommended (Class I, Level B-NR). (5) For patients being evaluated for neurointeventional brain aneurysm treatment who had venous thrombosis more than 3 months prior, discontinuation of oral anticoagulation (OAC) or vitamin K antagonists should be considered as weighed against the risk of delaying aneurysm treatment. For venous thrombosis less than 3 months in the past, delay of the neurointerventional procedure should be considered. If this is not possible, see atrial fibrillation recommendations (Class IIb, Level C-LD). (6) For patients with atrial fibrillation receiving OAC and in need of a neurointerventional procedure, the duration of TAT (triple antiplatelet/anticoagulation therapy=OAC plus DAPT) should be kept as short as possible or avoided in favor of OAC plus single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) based on the individual's ischemic and bleeding risk profile (Class IIa, Level B-NR). (7) For patients with unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations there is no indication to change antiplatelet or anticoagulant management instituted for management of another disease (Class IIb, Level C-LD). (8) Patients with symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) should continue DAPT following neurointerventional treatment for secondary stroke prevention (Class IIa, Level B-NR). (9) Following neurointerventional treatment for ICAD, DAPT should be continued for at least 3 months. In the absence of new stroke or transient ischemic attack symptoms, reversion to SAPT can be considered based on an individual patient's risk of hemorrhage versus ischemia (Class IIb, Level C-LD). (10) Patients undergoing carotid artery stenting (CAS) should receive DAPT before and for at least 3 months following their procedure (Class IIa, Level B-R). (11) In patients undergoing CAS during emergent large vessel occlusion ischemic stroke treatment, it may be reasonable to administer a loading dose of intravenous or oral glycoprotein IIb/IIIa or P2Y12 inhibitor followed by maintenance intravenous infusion or oral dosing to prevent stent thrombosis whether or not the patient has received thrombolytic therapy (Class IIb, C-LD). (12) For patients with cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, anticoagulation with heparin is front-line therapy; endovascular therapy may be considered particularly in cases of clinical deterioration despite medical therapy (Class IIa, Level B-R).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the quality of evidence is lower than for coronary interventions due to a lower number of patients and procedures, neurointerventional antiplatelet and antithrombotic management shares several themes. Prospective and randomized studies are needed to strengthen the data supporting these recommendations.

Mechanical thrombectomy beyond 24 hours from last known well in tandem lesions: A multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

While recent studies suggest a benefit of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for the treatment of patients with isolated large vessel occlusions presenting after 24 hours from the last known well (LKW), the effect of MT for acute cervical tandem lesions (TLs) beyond 24 hours remains unknown. We aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of MT beyond 24 hours of LKW in patients with TLs.

METHODS

We conducted a subanalysis study of patients with anterior circulation TL enrolled in a large, multicenter registry between January 2015 and December 2020. Patients were divided into 2 groups: MT beyond 24 hours versus MT 0-24-hour window. Outcomes of interest were functional independence (90-day modified Rankin scale 0-2), complete reperfusion (modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 3), delta NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), parenchymal hematoma 2 (PH2), in-hospital mortality, and 90-day mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance the groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 589 participants were included, with 33 treated beyond 24 hours and 556 treated in the 0-24-hour window. After IPTW, we found no significant difference in the rates of achieving functional independence (odds ratio (OR) = 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22-1.16; p = 0.108), complete reperfusion (OR = 1.35; 95% CI 0.60-3.05; p = 0.464), sICH (OR = 1.96; 95% CI 0.37-10.5; p = 0.429), delta NIHSS (β = -3.61; 95% CI -8.11 to 0.87; p = 0.114), PH2 (OR = 1.46; 95% CI 0.29-7.27; p = 0.642), in-hospital mortality (OR = 1.74; 95% CI 0.52-5.86; p = 0.370), or 90-day mortality (OR = 1.37; 95% CI 0.49-3.83; p = 0.544) across both time windows.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that MT appears to benefit patients with TLs beyond 24 hours from LKW. Future prospective studies are warranted.