Background The optimal treatment for medically refractory non-acute intracranial artery occlusion is uncertain, and endovascular recanalization remains a technical challenge. Here, a multicenter clinical experience of dual-roadmap guidance for endovascular recanalization of non-acute intracranial artery occlusion is reported, focusing on the technical feasibility and safety.
Methods From January 2014 to December 2019, 52 consecutive patients with medically refractory atherosclerotic non-acute intracranial artery occlusion who underwent endovascular recanalization under dual-roadmap guidance in three large regional referral stroke centers were analyzed retrospectively. Four types of dual-roadmap technical schemes were applied during endovascular recanalization. The rates of technical success, periprocedural complications, any stroke or death within 30 days, and follow-up results were evaluated.
Results The technical success rate was 92.3% (48/52). The perioperative complication rate was 7.7% (4/52), and the rate of any stroke or death within 30 days was 3.8% (2/52). Asymptomatic dissection occurred in two patients, acute in-stent thrombosis followed by postoperative mild stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) 3) in one patient, and death due to reperfusion hemorrhage after successful recanalization in one patient. The rate of stroke or death beyond 30 days was 6.5% (3/46). The median clinical follow-up period was 19 months, and the median imaging follow-up period was 12 months. The restenosis rate was 13.2% (5/38).
Conclusions Endovascular recanalization of non-acute intracranial occlusions can be performed with a high rate of technical success and few complications with assistance of the dual-roadmap technique for navigation. Four types of dual-roadmap schemes provide technical references.
Data availability statement
Data are available upon reasonable request. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. Our corresponding author takes full responsibility for the data.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors FG: study concept and design, study conduct, draft paper, critical revision of manuscript. XG: study conduct, acquisition of data, statistical analysis. XS: study conduct, acquisition of data. YL: study conduct, acquisition of data. YW: study conduct, acquisition of data. ZM: study conduct; critical revision of manuscript.
Funding This study was funded by National Key R&D Program (2018AAA0102600).
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
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.