Search

Importance: Whether endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) efficacy for patients with acute ischemic stroke and large cores varies depending on the extent of ischemic injury is uncertain., Objective: To describe the relationship between imaging estimates of irreversibly injured brain (core) and at-risk regions (mismatch) and clinical outcomes and EVT treatment effect., Design, Setting, and Participants: An exploratory analysis of the SELECT2 trial, which randomized 352 adults (18-85 years) with acute ischemic stroke due to occlusion of the internal carotid or middle cerebral artery (M1 segment) and large ischemic core to EVT vs medical management (MM), across 31 global centers between October 2019 and September 2022., Intervention: EVT vs MM., Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was functional outcome-90-day mRS score (0, no symptoms, to 6, death) assessed by adjusted generalized OR (aGenOR; values >1 represent more favorable outcomes). Benefit of EVT vs MM was assessed across levels of ischemic injury defined by noncontrast CT using ASPECTS score and by the volume of brain with severely reduced blood flow on CT perfusion or restricted diffusion on MRI., Results: Among 352 patients randomized, 336 were analyzed (median age, 67 years; 139 [41.4%] female); of these, 168 (50%) were randomized to EVT, and 2 additional crossover MM patients received EVT. In an ordinal analysis of mRS at 90 days, EVT improved functional outcomes compared with MM within ASPECTS categories of 3 (aGenOR, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.04-2.81]), 4 (aGenOR, 2.01 [95% CI, 1.19-3.40]), and 5 (aGenOR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.22-2.79]). Across strata for CT perfusion/MRI ischemic core volumes, aGenOR for EVT vs MM was 1.63 (95% CI, 1.23-2.16) for volumes ≥70 mL, 1.41 (95% CI, 0.99-2.02) for ≥100 mL, and 1.47 (95% CI, 0.84-2.56) for ≥150 mL. In the EVT group, outcomes worsened as ASPECTS decreased (aGenOR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.82-1.00] per 1-point decrease) and as CT perfusion/MRI ischemic core volume increased (aGenOR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.89-0.95] per 10-mL increase). No heterogeneity of EVT treatment effect was observed with or without mismatch, although few patients without mismatch were enrolled., Conclusion and Relevance: In this exploratory analysis of a randomized clinical trial of patients with extensive ischemic stroke, EVT improved clinical outcomes across a wide spectrum of infarct volumes, although enrollment of patients with minimal penumbra volume was low. In EVT-treated patients, clinical outcomes worsened as presenting ischemic injury estimates increased., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03876457.

Importance: Patients with large ischemic core stroke have poor clinical outcomes and are frequently not considered for interfacility transfer for endovascular thrombectomy (EVT)., Objective: To assess EVT treatment effects in transferred vs directly presenting patients and to evaluate the association between transfer times and neuroimaging changes with EVT clinical outcomes., Design, Setting, and Participants: This prespecified secondary analysis of the SELECT2 trial, which evaluated EVT vs medical management (MM) in patients with large ischemic stroke, evaluated adults aged 18 to 85 years with acute ischemic stroke due to occlusion of the internal carotid or middle cerebral artery (M1 segment) as well as an Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) of 3 to 5, core of 50 mL or greater on imaging, or both. Patients were enrolled between October 2019 and September 2022 from 31 EVT-capable centers in the US, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. Data were analyzed from August 2023 to January 2024., Interventions: EVT vs MM., Main Outcomes and Measures: Functional outcome, defined as modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days with blinded adjudication., Results: A total of 958 patients were screened and 606 patients were excluded. Of 352 enrolled patients, 145 (41.2%) were female, and the median (IQR) age was 66.5 (58-75) years. A total of 211 patients (59.9%) were transfers, while 141 (40.1%) presented directly. The median (IQR) transfer time was 178 (136-230) minutes. The median (IQR) ASPECTS decreased from the referring hospital (5 [4-7]) to an EVT-capable center (4 [3-5]). Thrombectomy treatment effect was observed in both directly presenting patients (adjusted generalized odds ratio [OR], 2.01; 95% CI, 1.42-2.86) and transferred patients (adjusted generalized OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.11-2.03) without heterogeneity (P for interaction = .14). Treatment effect point estimates favored EVT among 82 transferred patients with a referral hospital ASPECTS of 5 or less (44 received EVT; adjusted generalized OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.89-2.58). ASPECTS loss was associated with numerically worse EVT outcomes (adjusted generalized OR per 1-ASPECTS point loss, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77-1.02). EVT treatment effect estimates were lower in patients with transfer times of 3 hours or more (adjusted generalized OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.73-1.80)., Conclusions and Relevance: Both directly presenting and transferred patients with large ischemic stroke in the SELECT2 trial benefited from EVT, including those with low ASPECTS at referring hospitals. However, the association of EVT with better functional outcomes was numerically better in patients presenting directly to EVT-capable centers. Prolonged transfer times and evolution of ischemic change were associated with worse EVT outcomes. These findings emphasize the need for rapid identification of patients suitable for transfer and expedited transport., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03876457.