In:
Neuroradiology, Springer Science and Business Media LLC, Vol. 63, No. 6 ( 2021-06), p. 935-941
Abstract:
It is unclear whether stroke patients undergoing endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) should receive bridging intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), if eligible. This study aims at analyzing the impact of bridging IVT on short-term clinical outcome. Methods In a prospective regional stroke registry, all stroke patients with premorbid modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0–2 who were admitted within 4.5 h after onset and treated with EVT were analyzed retrospectively. Patients receiving “IVT prior to EVT” (IVEVT) were compared to those undergoing “EVT only” regarding the ratio of good outcome, discharge mRS, mRS shift, hospital mortality, and occurrence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Results In total, 2022 patients were included, 816 patients (40.4%) achieved good clinical outcome; 1293 patients (63.9%) received bridging IVT. There was no significant difference between both groups regarding the ratio of good outcome (IVEVT 41.4% vs. EVT 38.5%, P = 0.231), discharge mRS (median, IVEVT 3 vs. EVT 3, P = 0.178), mRS shift (median, IVEVT 3 vs. EVT 3, P = 0.960), and hospital mortality (IVEVT 19.3% vs. EVT 19.5%, P = 0.984). Bridging IVT was not a predictor of outcome (adjusted OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.79–1.26, P = 0.979). However, it was an independent predictor of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (adjusted OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.21–2.72, P = 0.005). Conclusions The results of the present study suggest that bridging IVT does not seem to improve short-term clinical outcome of patients undergoing EVT. Nonetheless, there might be a subgroup of patients that benefits from IVT. This needs to be addressed in randomized controlled trials.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
0028-3940
,
1432-1920
DOI:
10.1007/s00234-020-02619-1
Language:
English
Publisher:
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Publication Date:
2021
detail.hit.zdb_id:
1462953-7
Permalink
