Femoral Access-Site Complications with Tenecteplase versus Alteplase before Mechanical Thrombectomy for Large-Vessel-Occlusion Stroke.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: IV thrombolysis with alteplase before mechanical thrombectomy for emergent large-vessel-occlusion stroke is associated with access-site bleeding complications. However, the incidence of femoral access-site complications with tenecteplase before mechanical thrombectomy requires exploration. Here, femoral access-site complications with tenecteplase versus alteplase before mechanical thrombectomy for large-vessel-occlusion stroke were compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients receiving IV thrombolytics before mechanical thrombectomy for large-vessel-occlusion stroke who presented from January 2020 to August 2022 were reviewed. In May 2021, our health care system switched from alteplase to tenecteplase as the primary thrombolytic for all patients with stroke, facilitating the comparison of alteplase-versus-tenecteplase femoral access-site complication rates. Major (requiring surgery) and minor (managed conservatively) access-site complications were assessed. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-nine patients underwent transfemoral mechanical thrombectomy for large-vessel-occlusion stroke, of whom 46/139 (33.1%) received tenecteplase and 93/139 (66.9%) received alteplase. In all cases (n = 139), an 8F sheath was inserted without sonographic guidance, and vascular closure was obtained with an Angio-Seal. Baseline demographics, concomitant antithrombotic medications, and periprocedural coagulation lab findings were similar between groups. The incidence of conservatively managed groin hematomas (2.2% versus 4.3%), delayed access-site oozing requiring manual compression (6.5% versus 2.2%), and arterial occlusion requiring surgery (2.2% versus 1.1%) was similar between the tenecteplase and alteplase groups, respectively (P = not significant). No dissection, arteriovenous fistula, or retroperitoneal hematoma was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Tenecteplase compared with alteplase before mechanical thrombectomy for large-vessel-occlusion stroke is not associated with an alteration in femoral access-site complication rates.

A Critical Assessment of the Golden Hour and the Impact of Procedural Timing in Stroke Thrombectomy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous studies in acute ischemic stroke have demonstrated the importance of minimizing delays to endovascular treatment and keeping thrombectomy procedural times at <30-60 minutes. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of thrombectomy procedural times on clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively compared 319 patients having undergone thrombectomy according to procedural time (<30 minutes, 30-60 minutes, and >60 minutes) and time from stroke onset to endovascular therapy (≤6 or >6 hours). Clinical characteristics of patients with postprocedural intracranial hemorrhage were also assessed. Logistic regression was used to determine independent predictors of poor outcome at 90 days (mRS ≥3). RESULTS: Greater age (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P = .016), higher admission NIHSS score (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.16; P = .001), history of diabetes mellitus (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.05-3.65; P = .034), and postprocedural intracranial hemorrhage were independently associated with greater odds of poor outcome. Modified TICI scale scores of 2c (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.04-0.28; P < .001) and 3 (OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.06-0.38; P < .001) were associated with reduced odds of poor outcome. Although not statistically significant on univariate analysis, onset to endovascular therapy of >6 hours was independently associated with increased odds of poor outcome (OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.11-4.36; P = .024) in the final multivariate model (area under the curve = 0.820). Procedural time was not independently associated with clinical outcome in the final multivariate model (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Thrombectomy procedural times beyond 60 minutes are associated with lower revascularization rates and worse 90-day outcomes. Procedural time itself was not an independent predictor of outcome. While stroke thrombectomy procedures should be performed rapidly, our study emphasizes the significance of achieving revascularization despite the requisite procedural time. However, the potential for revascularization must be weighed against the risks associated with multiple thrombectomy attempts.

Pipeline Diameter Significantly Impacts the Long-Term Fate of Jailed Side Branches during Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Although covered side branches typically remain patent acutely following Pipeline Embolization Device embolization of intracranial aneurysms, the long-term fate of these vessels remains uncertain. We therefore elected to investigate factors that may influence the long-term patency of these covered side branches. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the long-term patency of side branches covered by the Pipeline Embolization Device at our institution during treatment of intracranial aneurysms with at least 6 months of conventional angiography follow-up. Procedural and anatomic factors that might influence the fate of covered side branches were explored. RESULTS: One hundred forty-eight Pipeline Embolization Device treatments in 137 patients met the inclusion criteria. In 217 covered side branches, 29 (13.4%) were occluded on follow-up, and 40 (18.4%) were stenotic. All stenoses and occlusions were asymptomatic. In the entire cohort and in the largest subset of ophthalmic arteries, a smaller Pipeline Embolization Device diameter was associated with branch vessel occlusion (P = .001, P = .013). When we considered stenotic and occluded side branches together, smaller Pipeline Embolization Device size (P = .029) and administration of intraprocedural abciximab (P = .03) predicted side branch stenosis/occlusion, while anterior choroidal branch type (P = .003) was a predictor of gross side branch patency. CONCLUSIONS: A smaller Pipeline Embolization Device diameter is associated with delayed side branch stenosis/occlusion following Pipeline Embolization Device treatment, likely due to the higher metal density of smaller caliber devices. Although hemodynamic factors, including the potential for collateral flow, are still paramount in determining the fate of covered side branches, the amount of metal coverage at the side branch orifice also plays an important role.