Article Text

Download PDFPDF
MISTIE III: a big step in the right direction
  1. Christopher P Kellner1,
  2. Adam S Arthur2,
  3. Mark Bain3,
  4. David Fiorella4,
  5. J Mocco1
  1. 1 Department of Neurosurgery, The Mount Sinai Health System, New York, NY, USA
  2. 2 Department of Neurosurgery, UT/Semmes-Murphey Clinic, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
  3. 3 Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
  4. 4 Department of Neurosurgery, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr J Mocco, The Mount Sinai Health System, New York City, NY 10029, USA; j.mocco{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

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.

On February 7 the results of phase 3 of the Minimally Invasive Surgery Plus rt-PA for Intracerebral Hemorrhage Evacuation (MISTIE III) trial were published in the Lancet.1 The trial did not reach its primary endpoint of improved functional outcome at 1 year. It did, however, generate a wealth of high-quality data that provide invaluable insight into this devastating disease.

MISTIE III was an open-label blinded endpoint trial performed at 78 hospitals in the USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, and Asia that randomized (1:1) 506 patients to minimally invasive surgery or standard medical treatment. Eligible patients presented with a hematoma measuring ≥30 mL, a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≥6, good baseline status, a CT angiogram negative for an underlying lesion, and a repeat CT demonstrating clot volume stability for at least 6 hours.

Average time to randomization was 47 hours in the surgical group and 46 hours in the medical group. The average time to surgery was 58.3 hours with an average procedural duration of 1 hour. Clinical deterioration led to craniotomy or craniectomy in four patients …

View Full Text


  • Competing interests CPK has received an educational grant from Penumbra. ASA receives research support and is a consultant for Penumbra. MB is a consultant for Rebound Therapeutics. DF receives research support from Penumbra. JM receives research support from Penumbra and is an investor and consultant for Rebound Therapeutics.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.