RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Endovascular revascularization results in IMS III: intracranial ICA and M1 occlusions
JF Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery
JO J NeuroIntervent Surg
FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
SP 795
OP 802
DO 10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011318
VO 7
IS 11
A1 Thomas A Tomsick
A1 Sharon D Yeatts
A1 David S Liebeskind
A1 Janice Carrozzella
A1 Lydia Foster
A1 Mayank Goyal
A1 Ruediger von Kummer
A1 Michael D Hill
A1 Andrew M Demchuk
A1 Tudor Jovin
A1 Bernard Yan
A1 Osama O Zaidat
A1 Wouter Schonewille
A1 Stefan Engelter
A1 Renee Martin
A1 Pooja Khatri
A1 Judith Spilker
A1 Yuko Y Palesch
A1 Joseph P Broderick
YR 2015
UL http://jnis.bmj.com/content/7/11/795.abstract
AB Background Interventional Management of Stroke III did not show that combining IV recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) with endovascular therapies (EVTs) is better than IV rt-PA alone.Objective To report efficacy and safety results for EVT of intracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) and middle cerebral artery trunk (M1) occlusion.Methods Five revascularization methods for persistent occlusions after IV rt-PA treatment were evaluated for prespecified primary and secondary endpoints, after accounting for differences in key baselines variables using propensity scores. Revascularization was scored using the arterial occlusive lesion (AOL) and the modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Ischemia (mTICI) scores.Results EVT of 200 subjects with intracranial ICA or M1 occlusion resulted in 81.5% AOL 2–3 recanalization, in addition to 76% mTICI 2–3 and 42.5% mTICI 2b–3 reperfusion. Adverse events included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH) (8.0%), vessel perforations (1.5%), and new emboli (14.9%). EVT techniques used were standard microcatheter n=51; EKOS n=14; Merci n=77; Penumbra n=39; Solitaire n=4; multiple n=15. Good clinical outcome was associated with both TICI 2–3 and TICI 2b–3 reperfusion. Neither modified Rankin scale (mRS) 0–2 (28.5%), nor 90-day mortality (28.5%), nor asymptomatic ICH (36.0%) differed among revascularization methods after propensity score adjustment for subjects with intracranial ICA or M1 occlusion.Conclusions Good clinical outcome was associated with good reperfusion for ICA and M1 occlusion. No significant differences in efficacy or safety among revascularization methods were demonstrated after adjustment. Lack of high-quality reperfusion, adverse events, and prolonged time to treatment contributed to lower-than-expected mRS 0–2 outcomes and study futility compared with IV rt-PA.Trial registration number NCT00359424.