Flint Alexander C, Duckwiler Gary R, Budzik Ronald F, Liebeskind David S, Smith Wade S
Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco CA 94143-0114, USA.
Stroke. 2007 Apr;38(4):1274-80. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000260187.33864.a7. Epub 2007 Mar 1.
Acute stroke from occlusion of the intracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) generally has a poor prognosis and appears to respond poorly to intravenous thrombolysis. Mechanical thrombectomy is a newly available modality for acute stroke therapy, but it is unknown whether this endovascular therapy may have a role in the specific setting of intracranial ICA occlusion. We therefore assessed the success rate of the Merci Retriever mechanical thrombectomy device in recanalization of intracranial ICA occlusions and sought to determine whether ICA recanalization with this therapy can result in better outcomes.
All patients with acute stroke from intracranial ICA occlusion were identified in the MERCI and Multi MERCI Part I trials. We determined the success rate of ICA recanalization with endovascular thrombectomy and then assessed clinical outcomes according to whether vessel recanalization was successful.
Eighty patients with acute stroke from intracranial ICA occlusion were identified. Of these 80 patients, 53% had successful ICA recanalization with the Merci Retriever alone and 63% had ICA recanalization with use of the Merci Retriever plus adjunctive endovascular treatment. Baseline patient characteristics and procedural complications did not differ between the recanalized and nonrecanalized groups. Good clinical outcome, defined by a modified Rankin Scale of 0 to 2 at 90 days, occurred in 39% of patients with ICA recanalization (n=19 of 49) and in 3% of patients without ICA recanalization (n=1 of 30) (P<0.001; one patient was lost to follow up for 90-day modified Rankin Scale). Ninety-day mortality was 30% (n=15 of 50) in the recanalized group and 73% (n=22 of 30) in the nonrecanalized group (P<0.001). Symptomatic hemorrhage was not significantly different between the recanalized (6% [n=3 of 50]) and nonrecanalized (16.7% [n=5 of 30]) groups (P=0.14). Hemorrhage rates were also not found to be influenced by use of intravenous thrombolysis before mechanical thrombectomy. Multivariable logistic regression identified ICA recanalization (OR=28.4, 95% CI=2.6 to >99.9) and lack of history of hypertension (OR=0.15, 95% CI=0.04 to 0.57) as significant predictors of a good 90-day outcome. Failure to recanalize the ICA (OR=0.16, 95% CI=0.05 to 0.51) and age (per decade, OR=1.07, 95% CI=1.03 to 1.13) were significant predictors of mortality at 90 days.
Mechanical thrombectomy of acute intracranial ICA occlusion using the Merci Retriever device, alone or in combination with adjunctive endovascular therapy, has a high rate of successful vessel recanalization. Subjects with successful ICA recanalization by this method have improved poststroke clinical outcome and survival compared with subjects in which the ICA is not successfully recanalized.
颅内颈内动脉(ICA)闭塞所致的急性卒中通常预后较差,且对静脉溶栓治疗反应不佳。机械取栓术是一种新的急性卒中治疗方式,但这种血管内治疗在颅内ICA闭塞的特定情况下是否起作用尚不清楚。因此,我们评估了Merci Retriever机械取栓装置对颅内ICA闭塞再通的成功率,并试图确定这种治疗方式实现ICA再通是否能带来更好的预后。
在MERCI和多中心MERCI I期试验中识别出所有因颅内ICA闭塞导致急性卒中的患者。我们确定血管内取栓术实现ICA再通的成功率,然后根据血管再通是否成功评估临床预后。
共识别出80例因颅内ICA闭塞导致急性卒中的患者。在这80例患者中,仅使用Merci Retriever装置时,53%的患者实现了ICA成功再通;使用Merci Retriever装置联合辅助血管内治疗时,63%的患者实现了ICA再通。再通组和未再通组患者的基线特征及手术并发症无差异。以90天时改良Rankin量表评分为0至2定义为良好临床预后,在实现ICA再通的患者中,39%(49例中的19例)达到这一标准,而在未实现ICA再通的患者中,这一比例为3%(30例中的1例)(P < 0.001;1例患者失访90天改良Rankin量表评分)。再通组90天死亡率为30%(50例中的共15例),未再通组为73%(30例中的共22例)(P < 0.001)。有症状性出血在再通组(6% [50例中的3例])和未再通组(16.7% [30例中的5例])之间无显著差异(P = 0.14)。在机械取栓术前使用静脉溶栓治疗也未发现对出血率有影响。多变量逻辑回归分析确定,ICA再通(比值比[OR]=28.4,95%置信区间[CI]=2.6至>99.9)和无高血压病史(OR = 0.15,95% CI = 0.04至0.57)是90天良好预后的显著预测因素。未能实现ICA再通(OR = 0.16,95% CI = 0.05至0.51)和年龄(每增加十岁,OR = 1.07,95% CI = 1.03至1.13)是90天死亡率的显著预测因素。
使用Merci Retriever装置对急性颅内ICA闭塞进行机械取栓术,单独使用或联合辅助血管内治疗,血管再通成功率较高。与未成功实现ICA再通的患者相比,通过这种方法成功实现ICA再通的患者卒中后临床预后及生存率有所改善。