Puig Josep, Werner Mariano, Dolz Guillem, Pascagaza Alejandro, Daunis-I-Estadella Pepus, Comas-Cufí Marc, González Eva, Fondevila Jon, Vega Pedro, Murias Eduardo, Romero Veredas, Martínez Carlos, Aparici-Robles Fernando, Morales-Caba Lluis, Remollo Sebastià, Rodríguez-Caamaño Isabel, Pérez-García Carlos, Rosati Santiago, Bashir Saima, Vielba-Gomez Isabel, Aixut Sonia, Paipa Andrés Julian, Martínez-Fernández Javier, Aguilar Yeray, Fandiño Eduardo, Barbieri Giorgio, García-Villalba Blanca, Cuba Víctor, Castaño Miguel, Blasco Jordi
Radiology Department CDI, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona and IDIBAPS, Barcelona, Spain.
Neurointerventional Department CDI, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
J Neuroimaging. 2025 Jan-Feb;35(1):e70012. doi: 10.1111/jon.70012.
The safety and effectiveness of endovascular techniques in elderly patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) remain controversial. We investigated the angiographic and clinical outcomes of nonagenarians treated with different endovascular techniques using a balloon guide catheter (BGC), distal aspiration catheter (DAC), and/or stent retriever (SR).
We analyzed the data from the Registry of Combined versus Single Thrombectomy Techniques (ROSSETTI) of consecutive nonagenarian patients with anterior circulation LVO and compared the outcomes of those treated with BGC+noDAC+SR (101-group), BGC+DAC+SR (111-group), and noBGC+DAC+SR (011-group). Demographic, clinical, angiographic, and clinical outcome data (National Institute of Health Stroke Scale score at 24 h [24h-NIHSS] and modified Rankin Scale score at 3 months) were compared. Predictors of the first-pass effect (FPE), defining Modified Treatment In Cerebral Ischemia 2c-3 (mTICI 2c-3) after one pass, were explored.
Of the 4111 patients from the ROSSETTI registry, 243 nonagenarians (68.7% female) were included in the analysis. The distribution of endovascular techniques was 101-group (61.4%), 111-group (15.6%), and 011-group (23%). The 101-group and 111-group had significantly shorter procedural times than the 011-group. The 111-group had a higher FPE rate, a lower number of passes, and a higher rate of final mTICI ≥2c than the other groups. The 24h-NIHSS score was significantly lower in the 111-group. In multivariate analysis, the only independent predictor for FPE was the BGC+DAC+SR endovascular technique (odds ratio 2.74 [confidence interval 1.16-6.47]; p = 0.021).
The addition of a DAC to a BGC increases the likelihood of FPE in nonagenarians with anterior circulation LVO SR-based thrombectomy for acute stroke.
血管内技术在老年大血管闭塞(LVO)患者中的安全性和有效性仍存在争议。我们使用球囊导引导管(BGC)、远端抽吸导管(DAC)和/或支架取栓器(SR),研究了不同血管内技术治疗非agenarians患者的血管造影和临床结局。
我们分析了连续的非agenarians前循环LVO患者的联合与单种血栓切除术技术登记处(ROSSETTI)的数据,并比较了接受BGC+无DAC+SR(101组)、BGC+DAC+SR(111组)和无BGC+DAC+SR(011组)治疗的患者的结局。比较了人口统计学、临床、血管造影和临床结局数据(24小时国立卫生研究院卒中量表评分[24h-NIHSS]和3个月改良Rankin量表评分)。探索了首次通过效应(FPE)的预测因素,定义为一次通过后改良脑缺血治疗2c-3(mTICI 2c-3)。
在ROSSETTI登记处的4111例患者中,243例非agenarians(68.7%为女性)纳入分析。血管内技术的分布为101组(61.4%)、111组(15.6%)和011组(23%)。101组和111组的手术时间明显短于011组。111组的FPE率更高,通过次数更少,最终mTICI≥2c的比率高于其他组。111组的24h-NIHSS评分明显更低。在多变量分析中,FPE的唯一独立预测因素是BGC+DAC+SR血管内技术(优势比2.74[置信区间1.16-6.47];p = 0.021)。
在BGC中添加DAC可增加非agenarians前循环LVO急性卒中基于SR的血栓切除术的FPE可能性。