Suppr超能文献

急性缺血性卒中血管内血栓切除术(ENCHANTED2/MT)后的强化血压控制:一项多中心、开放标签、盲终点、随机对照试验。

Intensive blood pressure control after endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke (ENCHANTED2/MT): a multicentre, open-label, blinded-endpoint, randomised controlled trial.

机构信息

Neurovascular Center, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China; Changhai Clinical Research Unit, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.

The George Institute for Global Health China, Beijing, China; Faculty of Medicine, The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

出版信息

Lancet. 2022 Nov 5;400(10363):1585-1596. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01882-7. Epub 2022 Oct 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The optimum systolic blood pressure after endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke is uncertain. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of blood pressure lowering treatment according to more intensive versus less intensive treatment targets in patients with elevated blood pressure after reperfusion with endovascular treatment.

METHODS

We conducted an open-label, blinded-endpoint, randomised controlled trial at 44 tertiary-level hospitals in China. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) had persistently elevated systolic blood pressure (≥140 mm Hg for >10 min) following successful reperfusion with endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke from any intracranial large-vessel occlusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1, by a central, web-based program with a minimisation algorithm) to more intensive treatment (systolic blood pressure target <120 mm Hg) or less intensive treatment (target 140-180 mm Hg) to be achieved within 1 h and sustained for 72 h. The primary efficacy outcome was functional recovery, assessed according to the distribution in scores on the modified Rankin scale (range 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]) at 90 days. Analyses were done according to the modified intention-to-treat principle. Efficacy analyses were performed with proportional odds logistic regression with adjustment for treatment allocation as a fixed effect, site as a random effect, and baseline prognostic factors, and included all randomly assigned patients who provided consent and had available data for the primary outcome. The safety analysis included all randomly assigned patients. The treatment effects were expressed as odds ratios (ORs). This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04140110, and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, 1900027785; recruitment has stopped at all participating centres.

FINDINGS

Between July 20, 2020, and March 7, 2022, 821 patients were randomly assigned. The trial was stopped after review of the outcome data on June 22, 2022, due to persistent efficacy and safety concerns. 407 participants were assigned to the more intensive treatment group and 409 to the less intensive treatment group, of whom 404 patients in the more intensive treatment group and 406 patients in the less intensive treatment group had primary outcome data available. The likelihood of poor functional outcome was greater in the more intensive treatment group than the less intensive treatment group (common OR 1·37 [95% CI 1·07-1·76]). Compared with the less intensive treatment group, the more intensive treatment group had more early neurological deterioration (common OR 1·53 [95% 1·18-1·97]) and major disability at 90 days (OR 2·07 [95% CI 1·47-2·93]) but there were no significant differences in symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage. There were no significant differences in serious adverse events or mortality between groups.

INTERPRETATION

Intensive control of systolic blood pressure to lower than 120 mm Hg should be avoided to prevent compromising the functional recovery of patients who have received endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke due to intracranial large-vessel occlusion.

FUNDING

The Shanghai Hospital Development Center; National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; Medical Research Futures Fund of Australia; China Stroke Prevention; Shanghai Changhai Hospital, Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality; Takeda China; Hasten Biopharmaceutic; Genesis Medtech; Penumbra.

摘要

背景

急性缺血性卒中血管内取栓后最佳收缩压尚不确定。我们旨在比较强化降压治疗与不强化降压治疗目标在接受血管内治疗再灌注后血压升高的患者中的安全性和疗效。

方法

我们在中国 44 家三级医院进行了一项开放标签、盲终点、随机对照试验。符合条件的患者(年龄≥18 岁)在接受急性缺血性卒中血管内取栓后持续出现收缩压升高(≥140mmHg 持续 10min 以上),且颅内大血管闭塞再通。患者按 1:1 比例(通过中央、基于网络的程序和最小化算法)随机分配到强化治疗组(收缩压目标<120mmHg)或不强化治疗组(目标 140-180mmHg),在 1h 内达到并持续 72h。主要疗效结局为 90 天时改良 Rankin 量表(范围 0[无症状]至 6[死亡])评分分布的功能恢复情况。分析采用比例优势逻辑回归,校正治疗分配作为固定效应、地点作为随机效应、基线预后因素,并包括所有同意并提供主要结局数据的随机分配患者。安全性分析包括所有随机分配的患者。治疗效果表示为优势比(OR)。该试验在 ClinicalTrials.gov、NCT04140110 和中国临床试验注册中心(注册号 1900027785)注册,所有参与中心均已停止招募。

结果

2020 年 7 月 20 日至 2022 年 3 月 7 日,共 821 例患者被随机分配。2022 年 6 月 22 日,在对结局数据进行审查后,该试验因持续存在的疗效和安全性问题而停止。407 例患者被分配到强化治疗组,409 例患者被分配到不强化治疗组,其中强化治疗组 404 例患者和不强化治疗组 406 例患者有主要结局数据。强化治疗组的不良功能结局发生率高于不强化治疗组(常见 OR 1.37[95%CI 1.07-1.76])。与不强化治疗组相比,强化治疗组有更多的早期神经恶化(常见 OR 1.53[95%CI 1.18-1.97])和 90 天主要残疾(OR 2.07[95%CI 1.47-2.93]),但两组的症状性颅内出血无显著差异。两组的严重不良事件或死亡率无显著差异。

解释

对于接受颅内大血管闭塞血管内取栓治疗的急性缺血性卒中患者,应避免强化控制收缩压至 120mmHg 以下,以防止影响患者的功能恢复。

资助

上海市医院发展中心;澳大利亚国家卫生和医疗研究委员会;澳大利亚医学研究未来基金;中国卒中预防;上海长海医院,上海市科学技术委员会;武田中国;Hasten Biopharmaceutic;Genesis Medtech;Penumbra。

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