Suppr超能文献

滴注、输送和取出:急性基底动脉闭塞的协同再通治疗。

Drip, ship, and retrieve: cooperative recanalization therapy in acute basilar artery occlusion.

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Klinikum Grosshadern, University of Munich, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

Stroke. 2010 Apr;41(4):722-6. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.567552. Epub 2010 Feb 11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In acute basilar artery occlusion, intra-arterial thrombolysis or endovascular mechanical recanalization may result in higher recanalization rates than intravenous thrombolysis. However, many patients are admitted to community hospitals, where endovascular therapy is usually not readily available. We initiated a "drip, ship, and retrieve" cooperative treatment protocol in 2006, in which thrombolysis was initiated in the community hospital with simultaneous referral to our stroke center and the use of endovascular mechanical recanalization as required.

METHODS

The outcome of all consecutive patients treated by this protocol between 2006 and June 2009 was compared with that of a similar population of referred patients who had received primary intra-arterial therapy with or without tirofiban bridging at our center between 2003 and 2005.

RESULTS

In both groups, 26 patients were identified. The rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was 12% in previous patients and 8% in those treated under the new protocol. Recanalization rates were similar: 92% in previous patients and 85% with the new protocol; 38% of these had recanalization after intravenous thrombolysis alone. Functional outcome was better among those treated with the new protocol, with more patients achieving a modified Rankin scale score < or = 2 (38% versus 12%; P=0.03) and < or = 3 (50% versus 23%; P=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

"Drip, ship, and retrieve" seems to be feasible and safe in acute basilar artery occlusion. Patients appear to benefit from initiation of intravenous thrombolysis in the community hospital before transfer. Randomized controlled trials will have to confirm the expected benefit of subsequent on-demand mechanical recanalization on clinical outcome.

摘要

背景与目的

在急性基底动脉闭塞中,与静脉内溶栓相比,动脉内溶栓或血管内机械再通可能会导致更高的再通率。但是,许多患者被收入社区医院,而血管内治疗通常无法立即进行。我们在 2006 年启动了一项“滴注、转运和取回”合作治疗方案,即在社区医院启动溶栓,同时转至我们的卒中中心,并根据需要使用血管内机械再通。

方法

比较了 2006 年至 2009 年 6 月期间通过该方案治疗的所有连续患者的结局,以及在 2003 年至 2005 年期间在我们中心接受过主要动脉内治疗(伴或不伴替罗非班桥接)的类似转诊患者的结局。

结果

两组均纳入 26 例患者。前一组患者的症状性颅内出血率为 12%,而新方案组为 8%。再通率相似:前一组为 92%,新方案组为 85%;其中 38%的患者仅经静脉内溶栓即可再通。新方案组的功能结局更好,更多的患者实现改良 Rankin 量表评分≤2(38%比 12%;P=0.03)和≤3(50%比 23%;P=0.04)。

结论

“滴注、转运和取回”在急性基底动脉闭塞中似乎是可行且安全的。患者在转至医院前于社区医院启动静脉内溶栓似乎获益。随机对照试验将不得不证实随后按需机械再通对临床结局的预期益处。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验