Chen Kuan-Chih, Li Te-Wei, Huang Ji-Kuan, Huang Cheng-Chieh, Zhang Siang-Yan, Chen Chih-Hung, Lin Zong-Syuan, Chen Po-Huang, Jhou Hong-Jie
Department of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Changhua Christian Hospital, Changhua 50006, Taiwan.
School of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung 80756, Taiwan.
Life (Basel). 2024 Oct 1;14(10):1249. doi: 10.3390/life14101249.
Endovascular treatment (EVT) is an established method for managing large vessel occlusion (LVO), but its efficacy in patients with mild stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] score < 6) remains debated. Given the clinical problem of early neurological deterioration in approximately 10% of mild stroke patients, understanding the role of EVT in managing these patients is crucial. Our objective was to perform a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis (TSA) focusing on mild stroke patients with LVO to determine whether EVT offers better outcomes than best medical therapy alone.
A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases up to 12 December 2023 identified 14 retrospective and prospective cohort studies, including a total of 4436 patients with NIHSS scores less than 6 and presenting with LVO. Studies were categorized into crossover and non-crossover groups to prevent overestimation of the treatment effect. In the crossover group, patients initially treated with BMT were moved to EVT upon clinical deterioration. In the non-crossover group, patients remained in their initially assigned treatment. Meta-analysis and data extraction followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The primary outcome was achieving an excellent functional outcome, defined as a modified Rankin scale (mRS) score of 0-1 at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included good (mRS 0-2) and favorable (mRS 0-3) functional outcomes. Safety outcomes were symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) and mortality at 3 months.
In the crossover group, EVT did not significantly improve excellent functional outcomes, and TSA results were inconclusive. Conversely, in the non-crossover group, EVT significantly improved the excellent functional outcome rates at 3 months (65.0% vs. 53.7%; OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.13 to 2.32), supported by TSA. EVT increased the risk of sICH in both crossover and non-crossover groups, while mortality rates did not significantly differ between EVT and BMT groups.
Our research indicates that thrombectomy may not significantly help mild stroke patients in recovering functional status and could increase the risk of sICH. The disparity in results between crossover and non-crossover studies highlights the critical need for the prompt identification of patients at risk of early neurological deterioration to minimize negative outcomes. Additional randomized controlled trials are essential to optimize the application of EVT in this patient population.
血管内治疗(EVT)是治疗大血管闭塞(LVO)的既定方法,但其在轻度卒中患者(美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表[NIHSS]评分<6)中的疗效仍存在争议。鉴于约10%的轻度卒中患者存在早期神经功能恶化的临床问题,了解EVT在治疗这些患者中的作用至关重要。我们的目的是进行一项荟萃分析并结合试验序贯分析(TSA),重点关注LVO的轻度卒中患者,以确定EVT是否比单纯最佳药物治疗能带来更好的结局。
对截至2023年12月12日的PubMed、Cochrane和Embase数据库进行全面检索,确定了14项回顾性和前瞻性队列研究,共纳入4436例NIHSS评分小于6且存在LVO的患者。研究分为交叉组和非交叉组,以防止高估治疗效果。在交叉组中,最初接受最佳药物治疗(BMT)的患者在临床病情恶化时转至EVT治疗。在非交叉组中,患者维持其最初分配的治疗。荟萃分析和数据提取遵循系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目指南。主要结局是在3个月时获得良好的功能结局,定义为改良Rankin量表(mRS)评分为0 - 1分。次要结局包括良好(mRS 0 - 2)和有利(mRS 0 - 3)的功能结局。安全性结局是症状性脑出血(sICH)和3个月时的死亡率。
在交叉组中,EVT并未显著改善良好的功能结局,TSA结果也无定论。相反,在非交叉组中,TSA结果支持EVT在3个月时显著提高了良好功能结局的发生率(65.0%对53.7%;比值比[OR] 1.62;95%置信区间[CI] 1.13至2.32)。在交叉组和非交叉组中,EVT均增加了sICH的风险,而EVT组和BMT组之间的死亡率无显著差异。
我们的研究表明,血栓切除术可能对轻度卒中患者恢复功能状态没有显著帮助,并且可能增加sICH的风险。交叉组和非交叉组研究结果的差异凸显了迫切需要迅速识别有早期神经功能恶化风险的患者,以尽量减少不良结局。额外的随机对照试验对于优化EVT在该患者群体中的应用至关重要。