From the Department of Neurology (R.-J.B.G., W.H.H., R.J. v.O.), Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University Medical Center.
Department of Neurology (R.A.v.d.G., J.M.v.R., D.W.J.D., B.R.), Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam.
Stroke. 2020 Jun;51(6):1781-1789. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.028675. Epub 2020 May 11.
Background and Purpose- The use of oral anticoagulants (OAC) is considered a contra-indication for intravenous thrombolytics as acute treatment of ischemic stroke. However, little is known about the risks and benefits of endovascular treatment in patients on prior OAC. We aim to compare outcomes after endovascular treatment between patients with and without prior use of OAC. Methods- Data of patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by an intracranial anterior circulation occlusion, included in the nationwide, prospective, MR CLEAN Registry between March 2014 and November 2017, were analyzed. Outcomes of interest included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and functional outcome at 90 days (modified Rankin Scale score). Outcomes between groups were compared with (ordinal) logistic regression analyses, adjusted for prognostic factors. Results- Three thousand one hundred sixty-two patients were included in this study, of whom 502 (16%) used OAC. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage between patients with and without prior OACs (5% versus 6%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.38-1.06]). Patients on OACs had worse functional outcomes than patients without OACs (common odds ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.47-0.66]). However, this observed difference in functional outcome disappeared after adjustment for prognostic factors (adjusted common odds ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.74-1.13]). Conclusions- Prior OAC use in patients treated with endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke is not associated with an increased risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage or worse functional outcome compared with no prior OAC use. Therefore, prior OAC use should not be a contra-indication for endovascular treatment.
背景与目的-口服抗凝剂(OAC)的使用被认为是急性缺血性脑卒中静脉溶栓治疗的禁忌证。然而,对于先前使用 OAC 的患者进行血管内治疗的风险和益处知之甚少。我们旨在比较有和无先前使用 OAC 的患者接受血管内治疗后的结局。
方法-分析 2014 年 3 月至 2017 年 11 月期间全国性前瞻性 MR CLEAN 登记研究中,因颅内前循环闭塞引起的急性缺血性脑卒中患者的数据。感兴趣的结局包括症状性颅内出血和 90 天(改良 Rankin 量表评分)的功能结局。使用(有序)逻辑回归分析比较两组间的结局,并对预后因素进行调整。
结果-本研究共纳入 3162 例患者,其中 502 例(16%)使用 OAC。有和无先前 OAC 的患者发生症状性颅内出血的发生率无显著差异(5%比 6%;调整后的优势比,0.63 [95%CI,0.38-1.06])。使用 OAC 的患者的功能结局较未使用 OAC 的患者差(常见优势比,0.57 [95%CI,0.47-0.66])。然而,调整预后因素后,这种功能结局的差异消失(调整后的常见优势比,0.91 [95%CI,0.74-1.13])。
结论-与无先前 OAC 使用相比,先前使用 OAC 的缺血性脑卒中患者接受血管内治疗后,症状性颅内出血或功能结局更差的风险并未增加。因此,先前使用 OAC 不应成为血管内治疗的禁忌证。