Search

In the 10 years since the FDA first cleared the use of endovascular devices for the treatment of acute stroke, definitive evidence that such therapy improves outcomes remains lacking. The decision to intubate patients undergoing stroke thrombectomy impacts multiple variables that may influence outcomes after stroke. Three main areas where intubation may deleteriously affect acute stroke management include the introduction of delays in revascularization, fluctuations in peri-procedural blood pressure, and hypocapnia, resulting in cerebral vasoconstriction. In this mini-review, we discuss the evidence supporting these limitations of intubation during stroke thrombectomy and encourage neurohospitalists, neurocritical care specialists, and neurointerventionalists to carefully consider the decision to intubate during thrombectomy and provide strategies to avoid potential complications associated with its use in acute stroke.

Context: New stroke thrombectomy devices have significantly improved recanalization rates in patients with large vessel occlusion. The first pass effect, or complete or near complete recanalization after a single pass of a device, is associated with better outcome. However, it remains unclear whether one technique is superior to the others at first pass recanalization. Objective: The successful recanalization rates of three common techniques: 1) Stent-retriever with the Solitaire or 2) Trevo device, or 3) primary aspiration (PA) with a distal aspiration catheter, were compared across three Kaiser Permanente Southern California Medical Centers over a 5-year period. Design: Retrospective review of cases between October 2013 and May 2018. Main Outcome Measure: Successful recanalization after a single pass of a device. Results: Forty-five percent of Solitaire thrombectomies resulted in first pass success, compared with 31% of Trevo and 39% of PA, not statistically significant (p = 0.26). Adjusted for age, gender, and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, the odds of successful recanalization were 1.90 ± 0.72 (CI 0.90-3.99, p = 0.09) for Solitaire compared with Trevo, and 1.41 ± 0.50 (CI 0.70-2.84, p = 0.33) for aspiration compared with Trevo. Conclusion: In this multi-center cohort, there was no statistical difference in successful first pass recanalization between Solitaire, Trevo, and PA. However, there was a trend towards improved efficacy with the Solitaire device compared to Trevo (OR 1.90, p = 0.09). Additional data are needed to determine the conditions under which design differences may favor one technique over another. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the 10 years since the FDA first cleared the use of endovascular devices for the treatment of acute stroke, definitive evidence that such therapy improves outcomes remains lacking. The decision to intubate patients undergoing stroke thrombectomy impacts multiple variables that may influence outcomes after stroke.Three main areas where intubation may deleteriously affect acute stroke management include the introduction of delays in revascularization, fluctuations in peri-procedural blood pressure, and hypocapnia, resulting in cerebral vasoconstriction. In this mini-review, we discuss the evidence supporting these limitations of intubation during stroke thrombectomy and encourage neurohospitalists, neurocritical care specialists, and neurointerventionalists to carefully consider the decision to intubate during thrombectomy and provide strategies to avoid potential complications associated with its use in acute stroke. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]