Background Randomized clinical trials have proven mechanical thrombectomy (MT) to be a highly effective and safe treatment in acute stroke. The purpose of this study was to compare neurothrombectomy data from the Czech Republic (CR) with data from the HERMES meta-analysis.
Methods Available nationwide data for the CR from 2016 from the Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke–Thrombectomy (SITS-TBY) registry for patients with terminal internal carotid artery (ICA) and/or middle cerebral artery (MCA) occlusions were compared with data from HERMES. CR and HERMES patients were comparable in age, sex, and baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores.
Results From a total of 1053 MTs performed in the CR, 845 (80%) were reported in the SITS-TBY. From these, 604 (72%) were included in this study. Occlusion locations were as follows (CR vs HERMES): ICA 22% versus 21% (P=0.16), M1 MCA 62% versus 69% (P=0.004), and M2 MCA 16% versus 8% (P<0.0001). Intravenous thrombolysis was given to 76% versus 83% of patients, respectively (P=0.003). Median onset to reperfusion times were comparable: 232 versus 285 min, respectively (P=0.66). A modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score of 2b/3 was achieved in 74% (433/584) versus 71% (390/549) of patients, respectively (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.90–1.5, P=0.24). There was no statistically significant difference in the percentage of parenchymalhematoma type 2 (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.66–1.90, P=0.68). A modified Rankin Scale score of 0–2 at 3 months was achieved in 48% (184/268) versus 46% (291/633) of patients, respectively (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71–1.18, P=0.48).
Conclusions Data on efficacy, safety, and logistics of MT from the CR were similar to data from the HERMES collaboration.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Contributors OV, RM, and BKM: substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; the acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of the data; drafting the work and revising it critically for important intellectual content. SB: analysis and interpretation of the data. AK, MB, PC, RH, DS, AT, MK, MR, RP, FC, MN, LJ, RH, VR, MK, PS, and JF: data acquisition, drafting the work and revising it critically for important intellectual content.
Funding This work was supported by National Program of Sustainability II, Czech Republic, grant No LQ1605.
Competing interests None declared.
Ethics approval The study was approved by the local institutional review boards.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.