补救性支架植入治疗急性缺血性脑卒中13例北大核心CSCD

目的探讨支架植入作为补救性措施治疗急性缺血性脑卒中的有效性与安全性。方法回顾性分析13例大脑前循环大血管闭塞发病8 h内并接受补救性支架植入治疗的急性缺血性脑卒中患者临床资料。所有患者治疗前均经其它再通术式(静脉溶栓、动脉溶栓、Penumbra装置吸栓、Solitaire支架取栓)未果。根据脑梗死溶栓(TICI)治疗后血流分级评价血管再通,记录围手术期出血及梗死并发症。根据美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)评分评价术后1周神经功能改善情况。根据改良Rankin量表(m RS)评分评价术后3个月预后指标。结果 13例接受补救性治疗患者共植入支架16枚,支架植入前采用Solitaire可回收支架取栓10例,Penumbra装置吸栓3例,经静脉尿激酶溶栓1例,经动脉尿激酶溶栓1例。12例(92.3%)患者闭塞血管部分或全部再通(TICI≥2B/3)。NIHSS评分由术前平均(16.15±5.81)分改善为术后1周平均(8.08±5.61)分,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后3个月,7例(53.8%)预后良好(m RS≤2),2例死亡。术后发生颅内出血2例,手术相关栓塞3例。结论颅内支架植入术作为不同组合药物溶栓治疗急性缺血性脑卒中患者血管再通的补救性措施,安全有效。     

急性缺血性脑卒中支架取栓首次成功再灌注的影响因素分析

目的 探讨前循环急性缺血性脑卒中(AIS)患者支架取栓术首次成功再灌注(FPR)的影响因素.方法 回顾性分析2018年1月至2020年3月在南京医科大学第一附属医院接受Solitaire AB支架取栓治疗的前循环AIS患者临床资料.根据首次支架取栓后闭塞血管再通程度是否达到改良溶栓治疗脑梗死(mTICI)血流分级2c/...     

脑机械取栓术后碘对比剂外渗的影像学研究进展

急性缺血性脑卒中是由于脑内动脉粥样硬化或者血栓脱落等各种原因造成供血动脉闭塞，引发脑组织缺血缺氧，进而出现神经功能障碍的疾病，如果不能及时开通病变血管，患者的致残率及致死率都将大为提高。传统治疗方法是静脉溶栓，此方法时间窗窄，且对大血管疗效欠佳，随着血管内治疗器械和技术的发展，研究表明对于合适的患者，机械取栓治疗方法优于传统治疗。然而术后常在梗死部位出现高密度区，其原因不仅包括碘对比剂外渗，还包括出血，二者的临床处理方法有明显的差异，将二者明确区分对于患者后续治疗方案选择及预后判断有重要意义。本文主要对机械取栓术后鉴别碘对比剂外渗及出血的各项影像技术方法进行综述。     

急性缺血性脑卒中急诊救治流程

缺血性脑卒中是目前我国最主要的致死致残病因之一,而其中颅内外大血管急性闭塞是病情严重、预后不良的亚型,导致了巨大的社会和经济负担。4.5 h内静脉应用重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂(recombinant human tissue type plasminogen activator,rt-PA)作为处理急性缺血性脑卒中证据最充分的治疗方式,已在世界范围内广泛开展,但限于其相对严格的时间窗和适应证、禁忌证要求,接受溶栓治疗的患者比例较低[1-3]。另外,相当部分的大血管闭塞性脑卒中对rt-PA并不敏感,仅5%~30%能够实现闭塞血管再通,患者获益程度有限[2-4]。近年来,多项国外随机对照研究结果证实,在颅内大血管闭塞性病变中,早期施行以支架型取栓装置为代表的血管内介入治疗能够显著改善患者预后[5-10]。在国内,2015年国家卫计委发布了《中国缺血性脑卒中血管内治疗指导规范》,中华医学会神经病学分会发布了《急性缺血性卒中血管内治疗中国指南2015》,对急性缺血性脑卒中急诊救治中的临床、检验、影像评估,以及静脉溶栓和血管内治疗的技术与时间管理均提出了明确的要求[2,11]。     

静脉溶栓桥接Solitaire支架取栓治疗急性缺血性脑卒中的效果分析

目的探讨静脉溶栓桥接Solitaire支架取栓开通颅内闭塞大血管的疗效。 方法回顾我院2014年6月—2015年10月采用桥接模式接受血管内治疗的15例急性缺血性脑卒中患者资料。分析大血管开通情况,术中、术后并发症发生情况,早期神经功能改善情况以及随访90 d时mRS情况。 结果15例患者中,大脑中动脉闭塞9例,颈内动脉颅内段合并大脑中动脉闭塞2例,椎基底动脉系统闭塞4例。所有患者大血管均获得开通。2例患者出现颅内出血,1例为颞叶出血、1例为丘脑出血。死亡2例。入院NIHSS评分(14.83±5.65)与3天后NIHSS评分(6.82±5.53)比较,差异有统计学意义。90 d随访临床结果优良患者9例(mRS<2)。 结论静脉溶栓桥接Solitaire支架动脉取栓能使大血管获得较好的再通率,显著改善急性缺血性脑卒中患者的预后。     

导丝留置技术在急性脑动脉闭塞机械取栓中的应用

目的 探讨导丝留置技术在急性脑动脉闭塞机械取栓术中的应用价值、安全性及可行性.方法 回顾分析2015年10月至2016年2月采用机械取栓治疗的15例急性缺血性脑卒中患者临床资料,其中大脑中动脉闭塞6例,颈内动脉及大脑中动脉闭塞5例,椎基底动脉闭塞4例.采用导丝留置技术快速准确判断血管闭塞特征,进行血管内机械取栓术治疗.结果 15例患者经导丝留置技术均成功准确判断病变血管闭塞特征.13例(87％)闭塞血管即刻再通,其中10例脑梗死溶栓后血流分级(TICI)评分达3分,5例2b分;2例因血栓负荷量大、闭塞节段长,多次取栓效果不佳,血管再通失败.美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)评分由术前19.2±7.0改善至术后1周6.3±3.6,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01).术后3个月10例改良Rankin量表(mRS)评分≤2分.结论 机械取栓治疗急性脑血管闭塞安全有效,导丝留置技术可安全、方便快捷、准确地判断出闭塞血管特征,减少手术操作,降低手术并发症,提高血管再通率.     

机械辅助动脉内溶栓治疗急性缺血性脑卒中

目的评估机械辅助动脉内尿激酶溶栓治疗缺血性脑卒中的临床疗效及安全性。方法 2007年1月至2010年10月对28例急性缺血性脑卒中患者,于发病时间在90～450 min行机械辅助动脉内尿激酶溶栓治疗。采用的机械辅助方法有导丝碎栓、导管抽吸取栓及支架应用等,术后统计血管再通率、出血并发症及3个月后改良Rankin量表(mRS)评分。结果 28例患者应用机械辅助溶栓成功再通血管23例,血管再通率为82.1%,平均血管再通时间为65.22 min,3个月后mRS评分均≤3分;5例血管再通无效者中2例死亡,1例mRS评分4分,2例mRS评分≤3分。血管再通组中,机械辅助溶栓并未增加出血并发症率。结论机械辅助溶栓治疗急性缺血性脑卒中安全有效,能减少尿激酶用量及血管再通时间,提高再通率。     

超选择性动脉溶栓联合血管内干预治疗急性缺血性脑卒中的临床探讨

目的探讨超选择性动脉溶栓联合血管内干预治疗急性缺血性脑卒中的疗效和安全性。方法回顾分析我院住院治疗的21例进行超选择性动脉溶栓的急性缺血性脑卒中患者的临床资料。结果21例患者中,颈内动脉系统病变16例．其中颈内动脉闭塞2例,大脑中动脉主干及分支闭塞6例,大脑前动脉闭塞1例,脑血管造影未见异常者7例。椎基底动脉闭塞5例,闭塞血管再通者,大脑中动脉4例,椎基底动脉2例。其中7例患者动脉溶栓的同时进行了血管内治疗,5例球囊成形术和2例支架植入术。临床症状完全恢复7例,明显好转或进步8例,无效3例,死亡3例;溶栓后脑出血2例．存活病例无1例并发脑出血及消化道出血。结论对选择的急性缺血性脑卒中患者进行超选择性动脉溶栓联合血管内干预治疗是安全有效的。     

影响急性缺血性脑卒中血管内治疗预后的相关因素分析

随着多项大型临床试验研究结果发布,血管内治疗(或联合静脉溶栓)被推荐为颅内大血管闭塞所致急性缺血性脑卒中患者首选治疗措施.然而,血管内再通治疗预后受到一系列因素影响.该文就影响血管内治疗预后的可能因素作一综述.     

颅内血栓抽吸系统联合可视性取栓支架治疗颅内大动脉急性梗死5例北大核心CSCD

目的探讨Penumbra抽吸系统联合Trevo取栓器治疗颅内大动脉急性闭塞的临床效果。方法收集2016年11月至12月采用ACETM取栓器联合Trevo可视性取栓支架机械取栓治疗的5例颅内大动脉急性梗死患者临床资料。其中前循环闭塞2例,后循环闭塞3例;平均(60.4±11.6)岁。术后观察患者取栓时间、闭塞血管再通和神经功能恢复情况。结果 5例患者穿刺-血管再通时间分别为29 min、32 min、35 min、33 min、30 min,平均(31.8±2.4)min;术中脑梗死溶栓(TICI)治疗后血流分级均达到3级;NIHSS评分由术前(11.0±7.4)分明显改善至术后24 h(4.2±1.1)分、7 d(1.8±1.3)分、30 d(0.9±0.6)分(P<0.05);改良Rankin量表(m RS)评分均为0~2分,且未发生颅内出血转化。结论 ACETM取栓器联合Trevo取栓支架机械取栓治疗颅内大动脉急性梗死,在取栓次数少、取栓时间短情况下,取得了最佳血管再通效果,临床预后良好。     

Use of self-expanding intracranial stents in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke

Conventional endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke includes intraarterial pharmacologic thrombolysis with tissue plasminogen activator (TPA) administration with or without mechanical thrombectomy with a variety of devices. The present report describes two cases of stroke refractory to TPA administration in which successful recanalization was accomplished by the use of a self-expanding intracranial stent. Stent-assisted recanalization may be a viable option for patients with acute ischemic stroke refractory to thrombolysis or thrombectomy.     

Techniques and results: intracranial stenting

Recanalization rates with conventional pharmacologic thrombolysis and thrombectomy devices in the treatment of large-vessel occlusions are low. Moreover, these patients do not have favorable clinical outcomes. Better recanalization devices and approaches are needed. In this review, we describe current stents used in the intracranial circulation and their application in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke due to large-vessel occlusion.     

Acute treatment for ischemic stroke in 2004

The last decade witnessed significant and unprecedented advances in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Intravenous tissue plasminogen activator and defibrinogenating agent are both now approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of acute ischemic stroke within 3 h of symptom onset. Trials involving intra-arterial thrombolysis have demonstrated clinical benefit in patients treated within 6 h of symptom onset. The future for the development of new and better treatment for ischemic stroke looks very promising. Currently, induced hypothermia, laser evaporation, mechanical thrombectomy, angioplasty with stent placement, the combination of neuroprotective agents with thrombolysis, and the combination of intravenous with intra-arterial thrombolysis are being investigated.     

Endovascular stroke treatment today

The purpose of this study was to review current treatment options in acute ischemic stroke, focusing on the latest advances in the field of mechanical recanalization. These devices recently made available for endovascular intracranial thrombectomy show great potential in acute stroke treatments. Compelling evidence of their recanalization efficacy comes from current mechanical embolectomy trials. In addition to allowing an extension of the therapeutic time window, mechanical recanalization devices can be used without adjuvant thrombolytic therapy, thus diminishing the intracranial bleeding risk. Therefore, these devices are particularly suitable in patients in whom thrombolytic therapy is contraindicated. IV and IA thrombolysis and bridging therapy are viable options in acute stroke treatment. Mechanical recanalization devices can potentially have a clinically relevant impact in the interventional treatment of stroke, but at the present time, a randomized study would be beneficial.     

Mechanical thrombectomy for acute stroke

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We evaluated a mechanical thrombectomy protocol to treat acute stroke and report the angiographic results and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Patients with anterior circulation strokes <8 hours and posterior circulation strokes <12 hours were treated at a single center over 10 months. Patients were excluded if they were candidates for intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (tPA). Treatment involved one of two mechanical thrombectomy devices. Retrieval was augmented by low-dose intra-arterial tPA if needed. Outcome was measured by using the Modified Rankin score. RESULTS: Ten patients were treated: five with anterior circulation strokes, four with posterior circulation strokes, and one with embolic strokes involving both circulations. Mean National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score at presentation was 24.6 +/- 10.9. In eight patients (80%), revascularization was successful (Thrombolysis in Acute Myocardial Infarction score, 3). Mean time from symptom onset to initiation of the procedure was 6 hours (5.3 hours for anterior circulation and 7.0 hours for posterior circulation). Mean time for recanalization from the start of the procedure was 1.17 +/- 0.58 hours for the six anterior circulation strokes and 2.75 +/- 1.34 hours in the two posterior circulation strokes. Five patients died within 48 hours; all had posterior circulation strokes. Mean Modified Rankin score at 90 days was 1.4. CONCLUSION: In this small series, mechanical thrombectomy of acute stroke appeared to improve recanalization rates compared with intra-arterial thrombolysis. No hemorrhagic complications occurred. Further study is required to determine the role of these techniques.     

Mechanical Thrombectomy in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke and Lower NIHSS Scores: Recanalization Rates,Periprocedural Complications,and Clinical Outcome

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Mechanical thrombectomy, in addition to intravenous thrombolysis, has become standard in acute ischemic stroke treatment in patients with large-vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation. However, previous randomized controlled stroke trials were not focused on patients with mild-to-moderate symptoms. Thus, there are limited data for patient selection, prediction of clinical outcome, and occurrence of complications in this patient population. The purpose of this analysis was to assess clinical and interventional data in patients treated with mechanical thrombectomy in case of ischemic stroke with mild-to-moderate symptoms.MATERIALS AND METHODS:We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected stroke data base. Inclusion criteria were anterior circulation ischemic stroke treated with mechanical thrombectomy at our institution between September 2010 and October 2015 with an NIHSS score of ≤8.RESULTS:Of 484 patients, we identified 33 (6.8%) with the following characteristics: median NIHSS = 5 (interquartile range, 4–7), median onset-to-groin puncture time = 320 minutes (interquartile range, 237–528 minutes). Recanalization (TICI = 2b–3) was achieved in 26 (78.7%) patients. Two cases of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage were observed. Favorable (mRS 0–2) and moderate (mRS 0–3) clinical outcome at 90 days was achieved in 21 (63.6%) and 30 (90.9%) patients, respectively.CONCLUSIONS:The clinical outcome of patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke with mild stroke due to large-vessel occlusion appears to be predominately favorable, even in a prolonged time window. However, although infrequent, angiographic complications could impair clinical outcome. Future randomized controlled trials should assess the benefit compared with the best medical treatment.

In several randomized multicenter stroke trials, mechanical thrombectomy has proved to be an effective treatment for large intracranial vessel occlusion in patients with acute ischemic stroke in the anterior circulation.^1–5 With the exception of the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN) trial⁴ and Extending the Time for Thrombolysis in Emergency Neurological Deficits–Intra-Arterial (EXTEND-IA),¹ all of those stroke trials did not include patients with minor-to-moderate stroke symptoms but focused on patients with a moderate or severe stroke with a score of at least 6–8 or higher on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. Consequently, the median NIHSS score for patients who underwent mechanical thrombectomy was about 15–17 in all trials; including the MR CLEAN und EXTEND-IA trials.Large intracranial vessel occlusions are not necessarily associated with a high baseline NIHSS score and could be missed in patients with low NIHSS scores.⁶ In a large single-center cohort, 72% of the patients presenting with mild stroke symptoms did not undergo advanced stroke imaging (eg, CT angiography or CT perfusion) before intravenous thrombolysis. However, visualization of a possible proximal occlusion is essential for further treatment decisions. If thrombus length exceeds 8 mm, intravenous thrombolysis has almost no potential to recanalize the occluded vessel.^7,8 The chance for a good clinical outcome (mRS 0–2) is only 7.7% in such cases.⁷ Furthermore, despite intravenous thrombolysis, mortality is 1.3%, and 30.3% of the patients who presented with mild initial stroke symptoms could not ambulate independently at discharge.⁹Even though the complication rate in mechanical thrombectomy is low, the clinical benefit for the patient has to outperform the cost and potential risks. Here, we assessed the outcome of patients with acute ischemic minor-to-moderate stroke who underwent mechanical thrombectomy at our institution. We present data on the location of occlusions, thrombus length, collateral status, recanalization rates, periprocedural complications, and clinical outcome.     

Acute stroke: techniques and results with the Merci retriever

Acute ischemic stroke is one of the most prominent causes of death and disability in the modern world. Despite extensive research, the only Food and Drug Administration-approved pharmacologic treatment is intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA). Although reperfusion remains the most robust predictor of clinical outcome, rt-PA has been linked to low recanalization rates in large-vessel occlusion. Endovascular techniques have been developed over past decade with several theoretic advantages over intravenous rt-PA alone, including longer treatment windows and higher recanalization rates in large-vessel occlusions. The Merci retriever thrombectomy device was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2004 for removing thrombus in acute ischemic stroke. In this article, we review the indications for acute stroke endovascular treatment with the Merci retriever as well as the involved techniques and the results of research studies.     

The benefit of intravenous thrombolysis prior to mechanical thrombectomy within the therapeutic window for acute ischemic stroke

The increase in risk for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) with age is well established. If not treated properly and promptly, AIS can result in permanent neurological damage and even death. This literature review assesses the clinical outcomes of AIS patients treated with both intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) prior to mechanical thrombectomy (MT) compared to those treated solely with mechanical thrombectomy. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses published from 2015 to 2020 and available on PubMed were selected for review, and their quantitative and qualitative findings were extrapolated and summarized. Post-hoc analyses from ASTER and ETIS trials were reviewed as well as the impact of combined therapy and monotherapy on large vessel occlusions (LVO). Clinical outcomes in all examined trials demonstrated significant successful reperfusion as well as a higher rate of functional independence at 90 days for IVT prior to MT. Concerns of thrombus fragility, safety and cost effectiveness of dual therapy are also addressed. Based on these findings, we recommend the use of IVT as a pretreatment procedure to MT for AIS when eligible for IVT. Recent articles further strengthen this recommendation and provide new insights that IVT prior to MT is especially beneficial for patients presenting with multiple LVOs localized to the anterior intracranial circulation. Additional multi-center RCTs are necessary for further analysis of statistical outcomes demonstrating mixed effects.