Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Background Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is a primary endovascular modality for acute intracranial large vessel occlusion. However, further treatment, such as rescue stenting, is occasionally necessary for refractory cases. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of rescue stenting in first-line MT failure and to identify the clinical factors affecting its clinical outcome.
Methods A multicenter prospective registry was designed for this study. We enrolled consecutive patients who underwent rescue stenting for first-line MT failure. Endovascular details and outcomes, follow-up patency of the stented artery, and clinical outcomes were summarized and compared between the favorable and unfavorable outcome groups.
Results A total of 78 patients were included. Intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis was the most common etiology for rescue stenting (97.4%). Seventy-seven patients (98.7%) were successfully recanalized by rescue stenting. A favorable outcome was observed in 66.7% of patients. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and mortality were observed in 5.1% and 4.0% of patients, respectively. The stented artery was patent in 82.1% of patients on follow-up angiography. In a multivariable analysis, a patent stent on follow-up angiography was an independent factor for a favorable outcome (OR 87.6; 95% CI 4.77 to 1608.9; p=0.003). Postprocedural intravenous maintenance of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor was significantly associated with the follow-up patency of the stented artery (OR 5.72; 95% CI 1.45 to 22.6; p=0.013).
Conclusions In this multicenter prospective registry, rescue stenting for first-line MT failure was effective and safe. For a favorable outcome, follow-up patency of the stented artery was important, which was significantly associated with postprocedural maintenance of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors.
- stent
- stroke
- thrombectomy
- atherosclerosis
Data availability statement
Data are available upon reasonable request. The relevant anonymized data are available on reasonable request.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
Data are available upon reasonable request. The relevant anonymized data are available on reasonable request.
Footnotes
Contributors BMK is responsible for the overall content as the guarantor. BMK had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: BMK. Acquisition of clinical data: BMK, EHI, C-HK, DJK, JHH, HSN, YDK, SS, BK, YW, BHB, WY, H-JK, YC, CJ, and HWJ. Analysis and interpretation of data: J-HB and BMK. Drafting of the manuscript: J-HB. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: J-HB and BMK. Statistical analysis: J-HB and BMK. Final approval of the version to be published: J-HB, BMK, EHI, C-HK, DJK, JHH, HSN, YDK, SS, BK, YW, BHB, WY, H-JK, YC, CJ, and HWJ.
Funding This study was investigator-initiated and supported/funded by a grant from Medtronic Korea.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.