Search

Medium-vessel occlusions (MeVO) are emerging as a new target for endovascular treatment (EVT). Primary MeVO occur de novo, while secondary MeVO arise from large vessel occlusion (LVO) through clot migration or fragmentation - spontaneously, following intravenous thrombolysis or EVT. We aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of EVT in primary and EVT-induced secondary MeVO. Retrospective single-center study on consecutive EVT-treated acute ischemic stroke, from 2019-to-2021. We considered: (1) exclusive-LVO, patients with LVO and – in case of residual distal occlusion – no rescue endovascular procedure; (2) primary MeVO: initial A2, A3, M2 non-dominant, M3, P2, P3 occlusions; (3) EVT-induced secondary MeVO, presenting LVO with subsequent (treated) EVT-induced MeVO. We compared (univariable/multivariable logistic regression) EVT efficacy (eTICI≥2b, 3-month modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0-2) and safety (EVT-complications [vessel dissection, perforation, persistent-SAH], symptomatic ICH) in all MeVO versus exclusive-LVO, primary MeVO versus exclusive-LVO, EVT-induced secondary MeVO versus exclusive-LVO and EVT-induced secondary MeVO versus primary MeVO. We included 335 patients: 221 (66.0 %) exclusive-LVO and 114 (34.0 %) MeVO (55 [48.2 %] primary, 59 [51.8 %] secondary). Compared to exclusive-LVO, primary MeVO had higher rates of EVT complications (aOR 3.77 [95%CI 1.58-9.00],p=0.003), lower rates of eTICI≥2b (aOR 0.32 [95%CI 0.12-0.88],p=0.027) and mRS 0-2 (aOR 0.28 [95%CI 0.13-0.63],p=0.002). EVT-induced secondary MeVO had no major differences in efficacy and safety outcomes compared to exclusive-LVO, but a better mRS 0-2 (aOR 8.00 [95%CI 2.12-30.17],p=0.002) compared to primary MeVO. Primary and EVT-induced secondary MeVO showed different safety/efficacy EVT-related profiles. Dedicated randomized data are needed to identify the best acute reperfusion strategy in the two categories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Ischemic stroke is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. For patients with large vessel occlusion stroke, endovascular treatment is now the most effective treatment. We aimed to assess the outcome of patients undergoing endovascular treatment for large vessel occlusion stroke in a real-world setting, comparing our results with data from randomized clinical trials, and recognizing the factors associated with prognosis.Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected data on endovascular procedures performed in one comprehensive stroke center in consecutive patients presenting with large vessel occlusion stroke from January 2017 to January 2020. Data on baseline clinical, imaging, and treatment-related characteristics were recorded. Selection of patients and treatment approach was not standardized but followed current guidelines for ischemic stroke. Functional outcome was evaluated 3 months after endovascular treatment. Clinical, imaging and treatment-related variables associated to outcome were evaluated with univariate and multivariable analyses.Results: Four hundred twelve patients were included in our study. Three-month functional independence was achieved in 50.5% of patients (50.3% in the anterior stroke and 52.1% in the posterior stroke subgroup). Successful arterial reperfusion was observed in 84.3% of patients. Age (odds ratio [OR] 0.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.87, p = 0.020]), severe stroke at onset (OR 0.40, 95%CI 0.19-0.83), procedure related complications (OR 0.45, 95%CI 0.20-0.99), and good collateral circulation (OR 2.69, 95%CI 1.17-6.16) were associated with 3-month functional independence in multivariable model.Conclusions: Our real-world outcome results are in line with data from large randomized clinical trials on endovascular treatment for large vessel occlusion stroke. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]