Lansberg Maarten G, Cereda Carlo W, Mlynash Michael, Mishra Nishant K, Inoue Manabu, Kemp Stephanie, Christensen Søren, Straka Matus, Zaharchuk Greg, Marks Michael P, Bammer Roland, Albers Gregory W
From the Stanford Stroke Center (M.G.L., C.W.C., M.M., N.K.M., M.I., S.K., S.C., M.S., G.Z., M.P.M., R.B., G.W.A.), Department of Neurology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA; and Stroke Center (C.W.C.), Department of Neurology, Neurocenter (EOC) of Southern Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland.
Neurology. 2015 Aug 25;85(8):708-14. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000001853. Epub 2015 Jul 29.
To evaluate whether time to treatment modifies the effect of endovascular reperfusion in stroke patients with evidence of salvageable tissue on MRI.
Patients from the Diffusion and Perfusion Imaging Evaluation for Understanding Stroke Evolution 2 (DEFUSE 2) cohort study with a perfusion-diffusion target mismatch were included. Reperfusion was defined as a decrease in the perfusion lesion volume of at least 50% between baseline and early follow-up. Good functional outcome was defined as a modified Rankin Scale score ≤2 at day 90. Lesion growth was defined as the difference between the baseline and the early follow-up diffusion-weighted imaging lesion volumes.
Among 78 patients with the target mismatch profile (mean age 66 ± 16 years, 54% women), reperfusion was associated with increased odds of good functional outcome (adjusted odds ratio 3.7, 95% confidence interval 1.2-12, p = 0.03) and attenuation of lesion growth (p = 0.02). Time to treatment did not modify these effects (p value for the time × reperfusion interaction is 0.6 for good functional outcome and 0.3 for lesion growth). Similarly, in the subgroup of patients with reperfusion (n = 46), time to treatment was not associated with good functional outcome (p = 0.2).
The association between endovascular reperfusion and improved functional and radiologic outcomes is not time-dependent in patients with a perfusion-diffusion mismatch. Proof that patients with mismatch benefit from endovascular therapy in the late time window should come from a randomized placebo-controlled trial.
评估治疗时间是否会改变血管内再灌注对MRI显示有可挽救组织证据的卒中患者的疗效。
纳入来自“用于理解卒中演变的弥散与灌注成像评估2(DEFUSE 2)”队列研究且存在灌注-弥散目标不匹配的患者。再灌注定义为基线与早期随访之间灌注病变体积减少至少50%。良好功能结局定义为90天时改良Rankin量表评分≤2。病变增长定义为基线与早期随访弥散加权成像病变体积之差。
在78例具有目标不匹配特征的患者中(平均年龄66±16岁,54%为女性),再灌注与良好功能结局的几率增加相关(校正比值比3.7,95%置信区间1.2 - 12,p = 0.03)以及病变增长的减轻相关(p = 0.02)。治疗时间并未改变这些效应(时间×再灌注交互作用的p值,良好功能结局为0.6,病变增长为0.3)。同样,在再灌注患者亚组(n = 46)中,治疗时间与良好功能结局无关(p = 0.2)。
对于存在灌注-弥散不匹配的患者,血管内再灌注与功能及影像学结局改善之间的关联不依赖于时间。关于不匹配患者在晚期时间窗从血管内治疗中获益的证据应来自随机安慰剂对照试验。