Department of Neurosurgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.
Department of Neurosurgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States.
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2022 Oct;31(10):106717. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2022.106717. Epub 2022 Aug 19.
Intra-arterial tissue plasminogen activator (IA tPA) is sometimes used in conjunction with aspiration catheters and stentrievers to achieve recanalization in endovascular thrombectomy (ET) for large vessel occlusion (LVO). Reports of safety and efficacy of this approach are limited by technical heterogeneity and sample size.
We retrospectively reviewed a data set of patients undergoing ET for LVO between August 2017 and September 2020 to identify those that received IA tPA. IA tPA usage, timing and dosage was at the discretion of the operative neurosurgeon. We identified three broad categories of IA tPA administration: (1) adjunctive with the first pass; (2) salvage with subsequent passes after first pass achieved incomplete revascularization; and (3) post-thrombectomy residual distal occlusions. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were performed to test associations with recanalization, hemorrhage, and functional independence.
Among 271 patients, 158 (58%) patients had IA tPA, of which 83 received adjuvant IA tPA, 60 received salvage IA tPA, and 15 received post-thrombectomy IA tPA for distal occlusions. There were no differences in demographics, stroke etiology and premorbid medications between these groups. Patients receiving salvage IA tPA had longer times from groin access to recanalization and more passes, as expected. On multivariate analysis neither adjunctive nor salvage IA tPA was significantly associated with recanalization, post-operative hemorrhage, or functional outcomes. On univariate analysis, patients receiving salvage IA tPA had lower rates of TICI 3 or 2b revascularization (80% vs. 89% adjunctive and 92% no IA tPA, p = 0.003) and higher rates of any postoperative hemorrhage (33% vs. 22% adjunctive and 19% no IA tPA, p = 0.003).
In this retrospective, single-institution series, IA tPA used adjunctively or as salvage therapy in ET for LVO was not associated with recanalization, post-operative hemorrhage, or functional outcomes, suggesting IA tPA is an available modality that can be utilized in cases of recalcitrant clots.
在血管内血栓切除术 (ET) 中,有时会联合使用动脉内组织纤溶酶原激活剂 (IA tPA) 和抽吸导管及支架取栓器来实现大血管闭塞 (LVO) 的再通。这种方法的安全性和有效性的报告受到技术异质性和样本量的限制。
我们回顾性分析了 2017 年 8 月至 2020 年 9 月期间接受 LVO ET 治疗的患者数据集,以确定接受 IA tPA 的患者。IA tPA 的使用、时间和剂量由手术神经外科医生决定。我们确定了 IA tPA 给药的三个广泛类别:(1) 初次通过时的辅助治疗;(2) 初次通过不完全再通后后续通过时的挽救治疗;(3) 血栓切除术后残留的远端闭塞。我们进行了单变量和多变量逻辑回归分析,以测试与再通、出血和功能独立性的关联。
在 271 名患者中,有 158 名 (58%)患者接受了 IA tPA,其中 83 名接受了辅助 IA tPA,60 名接受了挽救性 IA tPA,15 名接受了血栓切除术后远端闭塞的 IA tPA。这些组之间在人口统计学、中风病因和术前用药方面没有差异。接受挽救性 IA tPA 的患者从股动脉入路到再通的时间更长,通过次数更多,这是意料之中的。多变量分析表明,辅助或挽救性 IA tPA 均与再通、术后出血或功能结果无显著相关性。单变量分析显示,接受挽救性 IA tPA 的患者 TICI 3 或 2b 再通率较低 (80% vs. 89% 辅助和 92% 无 IA tPA,p = 0.003),任何术后出血的发生率较高 (33% vs. 22% 辅助和 19% 无 IA tPA,p = 0.003)。
在这项回顾性、单中心系列研究中,在 LVO 的 ET 中联合使用或作为挽救性治疗的 IA tPA 与再通、术后出血或功能结果无关,表明 IA tPA 是一种可用的治疗方法,可以用于治疗顽固的血栓。