Background Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) for patients treated with mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for proximal occlusions has recently been questioned through randomized trials. However, few patients with M2 occlusions were included. We investigated the influence of prior IVT for patients presenting M2 occlusions treated with MT in comparison with MT alone.
Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of the Endovascular Treatment in Ischemic Stroke (ETIS) registry, a multicenter observational study. Data from consecutive patients treated with MT for M2 occlusions between January 2015 and January 2022 at 26 comprehensive stroke centers were analyzed. The primary endpoint was 90-day modified Rankin Scale score of 0–2. Outcomes were compared using propensity score approaches. We also performed sensitivity analysis in relevant subgroups of patients.
Results Among 1132 patients with M2 occlusions treated with MT, 570 received prior IVT. The two groups were comparable after propensity analysis. The rate of favorable functional outcome was significantly higher in the IVT+MT group compared with the MT alone group (59.8% vs 44.7%; adjusted OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.75, P=0.008). Hemorrhagic and procedural complications were similar in both groups. In sensitivity analysis excluding patients with anticoagulation treatment, favorable recanalization was more frequent in the IVT+MT group (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.70, P=0.004).
Conclusions In cases of M2 occlusions, prior IVT combined with MT resulted in better functional outcome than MT alone, without increasing the rate of hemorrhagic or procedural complications. These results suggest the benefit of IVT in patients undergoing MT for M2 occlusions.
Data availability statement
Data are available upon reasonable request. The data used in this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
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.
Twitter @gboulouis, @jildazz, @vincelal
Collaborators ETIS investigators (see uploaded online supplemental appendix).
Contributors We attest that all authors have read and approved the submitted manuscript. All authors have made substantial contributions and have approved the final submitted version. GM is the guarantor.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
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.