Clinical Outcomes of Endovascular Thrombectomy in Tissue Plasminogen Activator versus Non-Tissue Plasminogen Activator Patients at Primary Stroke Care Centers

Meta-analysis of direct endovascular thrombectomy vs bridging therapy in the management of acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion

BACKGROUND

Debates persist when using intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) before mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to large-vessel occlusion (LVO). This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized evidence on outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion (AIS-LVO), comparing bridging therapy (BT) with MT alone.

METHOD

We conducted searches of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to July 2023 to identify pertinent clinical trials and observational studies.

RESULT

76 studies, involving 37,658 patients, revealed no significant difference in 90-day functional independence between DEVT and BT. However, a trend favoring BT for achieving functional independence with a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) of 0-1 was observed, having Odds ratio (OR) of 0.75 (95% CI 0.66-0.86; p < 0.001). DEVT was associated with higher postprocedural mortality (OR 1.44;95% CI 1.25-1.65; p < 0.001), but a lower risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage compared to BT (OR 0.855; 95% CI 0.621-1.177; p = 0.327). Successful recanalization rates favored BT, emphasizing the importance of individualized treatment decisions (OR 0.759; 95% CI 0.594-0.969; p = 0.027). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to identify key contributors to heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis underscores the intricate equilibrium between functional efficacy and safety in the evaluation of DEVT and BT for ACS-LVO. Fundamentally, while BT appears more efficacious, concerns about safety arise due to the superior safety profile demonstrated by DEVT. Individualized treatment decisions are imperative, and further trials are warranted to enhance precision in clinical guidance.

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.

Neuroprotection in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Battle Against the Biology of Nature

Stroke is the second most common cause of global death following coronary artery disease. Time is crucial in managing stroke to reduce the rapidly progressing insult of the ischemic penumbra and the serious neurologic deficits that might follow it. Strokes are mainly either hemorrhagic or ischemic, with ischemic being the most common of all types of strokes. Thrombolytic therapy with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator and endovascular thrombectomy are the main types of management of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). In addition, there is a vital need for neuroprotection in the setting of AIS. Neuroprotective agents are important to investigate as they may reduce mortality, lessen disability, and improve quality of life after AIS. In our review, we will discuss the main types of management and the different modalities of neuroprotection, their mechanisms of action, and evidence of their effectiveness after ischemic stroke.

Bridging Thrombolysis Achieved Better Outcomes Than Direct Thrombectomy After Large Vessel Occlusion: An Updated Meta-Analysis

The utility and necessity of pretreatment with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) before mechanical thrombectomy (MT) remains an issue of strong debate. This study aims to compare the outcomes of bridging thrombolysis (BT, IVT+MT) with direct MT (d-MT) after large vessel ischemic stroke based on the most up-to-date evidence. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library from January 2017 to June 2020 were searched for studies that directly compared the outcomes of the 2 strategies. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. Combined estimates of odds ratios (ORs) of BT versus d-MT were derived. Multiple subgroup analyses were performed, especially for IVT-eligible patients. Thirty studies involving 7191 patients in the BT group and 4891 patients in the d-MT group were included. Methodological quality was generally high. Compared with patients in the d-MT group, patients in the BT group showed significantly better functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score 0-2) at 90 days (OR=1.43 [95% CI, 1.28-1.61]), had lower mortality at 90 days (OR=0.67 [95% CI, 0.60-0.75]), and achieved higher successful recanalization (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Ischemia score 2b-3) rate (OR=1.23 [95% CI, 1.07-1.42]). No significant difference was detected in the occurrence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage between 2 groups (OR=1.01 [95% CI, 0.86-1.19]). Subgroup analysis showed that functional independence frequency remained significantly higher in BT group regardless of IVT eligibility or study design. Compared with d-MT, bridging with IVT led to better clinical outcomes, lower mortality at 90 days, and higher successful recanalization rates, without increasing the risk of near-term hemorrhagic complications. The benefits of BT based on this most recent literature evidence support the current guidelines of using BT.

Is intravenous thrombolysis still necessary in patients who undergo mechanical thrombectomy?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize available evidence on the potential utility of pretreatment with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) using recombinant tissue-plasminogen activator (rt-PA) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients with large vessel occlusions (LVO) who are treated with mechanical thrombectomy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite theoretical concerns of a higher bleeding risk with IVT pretreatment, there are no data showing increased risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) in patients with LVO receiving bridging therapy (IVT and mechanical thrombectomy) compared with direct mechanical thrombectomy (dMT). Additionally, evidence from observational studies suggest lower rates of infarctions in previously unaffected territories and higher rates of successful reperfusion, with lower number of device passes, in patients receiving bridging therapy. There are substantial discrepancies in studies comparing clinical outcomes between dMT and bridging therapy that are directly related to the inclusion of patients with contraindications to IVT in the dMT group. Ongoing clinical trials will provide definitive answers on the potential additional benefit of IVT in LVO patients receiving mechanical thrombectomy.

SUMMARY

IVT and mechanical thrombectomy are two effective reperfusion therapies that should be used in a swift and noncompeting fashion in AIS patients. AIS patients with LVO and no contraindications for IVT should receive promptly rt-PA bolus followed by immediate initiation of mechanical thrombectomy as indicated by current international recommendations, unless future randomized controlled trials provide evidence to proceed differently.