Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Adicionar filtros








Intervalo de ano
1.
Journal of Stroke ; : 272-281, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | WPRIM | ID: wpr-1001574

RESUMO

Background@#and Purpose This study aimed to investigate the effect of endovascular treatment (EVT, with or without intravenous thrombolysis [IVT]) versus IVT alone on outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and intracranial large vessel occlusion (LVO) attributable to cervical artery dissection (CeAD). @*Methods@#This multinational cohort study was conducted based on prospectively collected data from the EVA-TRISP (EndoVAscular treatment and ThRombolysis for Ischemic Stroke Patients) collaboration. Consecutive patients (2015–2019) with AIS-LVO attributable to CeAD treated with EVT and/or IVT were included. Primary outcome measures were (1) favorable 3-month outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0–2) and (2) complete recanalization (thrombolysis in cerebral infarction scale 2b/3). Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (OR [95% CI]) from logistic regression models were calculated (unadjusted, adjusted). Secondary analyses were performed in the patients with LVO in the anterior circulation (LVOant) including propensity score matching. @*Results@#Among 290 patients, 222 (76.6%) had EVT and 68 (23.4%) IVT alone. EVT-treated patients had more severe strokes (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, median [interquartile range]: 14 [10–19] vs. 4 [2–7], P<0.001). The frequency of favorable 3-month outcome did not differ significantly between both groups (EVT: 64.0% vs. IVT: 86.8%; ORadjusted 0.56 [0.24–1.32]). EVT was associated with higher rates of recanalization (80.5% vs. 40.7%; ORadjusted 8.85 [4.28–18.29]) compared to IVT. All secondary analyses showed higher recanalization rates in the EVT-group, which however never translated into better functional outcome rates compared to the IVT-group. @*Conclusion@#We observed no signal of superiority of EVT over IVT regarding functional outcome in CeAD-patients with AIS and LVO despite higher rates of complete recanalization with EVT. Whether pathophysiological CeAD-characteristics or their younger age might explain this observation deserves further research.

2.
Journal of Stroke ; : 358-366, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | WPRIM | ID: wpr-900663

RESUMO

The benefits of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and a large ischemic core (LIC) at presentation are uncertain. We aimed to obtain up-to-date aggregate estimates of the outcomes following MT in patients with volumetrically assessed LIC. We conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-conformed, PROSPERO-registered, systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that included patients with AIS and a baseline LIC treated with MT, reported ischemic core volume quantitatively, and included patients with a LIC defined as a core volume ≥50 mL. The search was restricted to studies published between January 2015 and June 2020. Random-effects-meta-analysis was used to assess the effect of MT on 90-day unfavorable outcome (i.e., modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 3–6), mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) occurrence. Sensitivity analyses were performed for imaging-modality (computed tomography-perfusion or magnetic resonance-diffusion weighted imaging) and LIC-definition (≥50 or ≥70 mL). We analyzed 10 studies (954 patients), including six (682 patients) with a control group, allowing to compare 332 patients with MT to 350 who received best-medical-management alone. Overall, after MT the rate of patients with mRS 3–6 at 90 days was 74% (99% confidence interval [CI], 67 to 84; Z-value=7.04; I2=92.3%) and the rate of 90-day mortality was 36% (99% CI, 33 to 40; Z-value=–7.07; I2=74.5). Receiving MT was associated with a significant decrease in mRS 3–6 odds ratio (OR) 0.19 (99% CI, 0.11 to 0.33; P<0.01; Z-value=–5.92; I2=62.56) and in mortality OR 0.60 (99% CI, 0.34 to 1.06; P=0.02; Z-value=–2.30; I2=58.72). Treatment group did not influence the proportion of patients experiencing sICH, OR 0.96 (99% CI, 0.2 to 1.49; P=0.54; Z-value=–0.63; I2=64.74). Neither imaging modality for core assessment, nor LIC definition influenced the aggregated outcomes. Using aggregate estimates, MT appeared to decrease the risk of unfavorable functional outcome in patients with a LIC assessed volumetrically at baseline.

3.
Journal of Stroke ; : 358-366, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | WPRIM | ID: wpr-892959

RESUMO

The benefits of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and a large ischemic core (LIC) at presentation are uncertain. We aimed to obtain up-to-date aggregate estimates of the outcomes following MT in patients with volumetrically assessed LIC. We conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-conformed, PROSPERO-registered, systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that included patients with AIS and a baseline LIC treated with MT, reported ischemic core volume quantitatively, and included patients with a LIC defined as a core volume ≥50 mL. The search was restricted to studies published between January 2015 and June 2020. Random-effects-meta-analysis was used to assess the effect of MT on 90-day unfavorable outcome (i.e., modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 3–6), mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) occurrence. Sensitivity analyses were performed for imaging-modality (computed tomography-perfusion or magnetic resonance-diffusion weighted imaging) and LIC-definition (≥50 or ≥70 mL). We analyzed 10 studies (954 patients), including six (682 patients) with a control group, allowing to compare 332 patients with MT to 350 who received best-medical-management alone. Overall, after MT the rate of patients with mRS 3–6 at 90 days was 74% (99% confidence interval [CI], 67 to 84; Z-value=7.04; I2=92.3%) and the rate of 90-day mortality was 36% (99% CI, 33 to 40; Z-value=–7.07; I2=74.5). Receiving MT was associated with a significant decrease in mRS 3–6 odds ratio (OR) 0.19 (99% CI, 0.11 to 0.33; P<0.01; Z-value=–5.92; I2=62.56) and in mortality OR 0.60 (99% CI, 0.34 to 1.06; P=0.02; Z-value=–2.30; I2=58.72). Treatment group did not influence the proportion of patients experiencing sICH, OR 0.96 (99% CI, 0.2 to 1.49; P=0.54; Z-value=–0.63; I2=64.74). Neither imaging modality for core assessment, nor LIC definition influenced the aggregated outcomes. Using aggregate estimates, MT appeared to decrease the risk of unfavorable functional outcome in patients with a LIC assessed volumetrically at baseline.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA