HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Data Supplement Correspondence: Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Correspondence are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mandava, P. Articles by Kent, T. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mandava, P. Articles by Kent, T. A. Related Collections Outcome research Clinical trials Systematic review/meta analysis Natural history studies (prognosis)

Intra-arterial therapies for acute ischemic stroke

From the Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center Stroke Program and Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr Kent, Department of Neurology, Baylor College of Medicine, 2B223, 2002 Holcombe Blvd., Houston, TX 77030 tkent{at}bcm.tmc.edu

Background: There are no randomized trials comparing intra-arterial (IA) therapy with best medical treatment for acute ischemic stroke. To assess potential benefit from this therapeutic approach, we performed a systematic review of published IA series. Because outcome from stroke is highly dependent on baseline characteristics, we compared results against prognostic models adjusted for admission National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores and age.

Methods: We selected articles from MEDLINE and Cochrane Databases based on specified criteria that included 3-month clinical follow-up. Outcome functions from prognostic models were generated and difference from prediction calculated for each study. Best and worst mortality performers were identified and assessed for factors that distinguished them.

Results: We identified 27 reports with 30 treatment series representing 1,117 patients. Percent difference from predicted outcomes varied from –51 to +24.6% for mortality and –30.3 to +28.7% for good functional outcome. A mean overall difference in the percent that died compared with prediction was 0.25% (SD: ±3.5%; 95% CI: ±0.53) and in the percentage of those that achieved a good functional outcome compared with prediction was –0.15% (SD: ±2.7%; 95% CI: ±0.44). The quartile of better mortality performers relative to worst performers had a 4.8-point more severe NIHSS score at baseline (p = 0.028) and employed 50% lower doses of the most frequently used thrombolytic urokinase (p = 0.0034).

Conclusion: We found considerable variability and lack of evidence for a net improvement in outcome after intra-arterial therapy relative to predicted natural history, substantiating the need for a prospective comparison with best medical therapy. The features associated with better performers identified here may be useful in designing such a trial.

Supplemental data at www.neurology.org

Disclosure: The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Received June 22, 2006. Accepted in final form February 2, 2007.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. L. Saver, G. W. Albers, B. Dunn, K. C. Johnston, M. Fisher, and for the STAIR VI Consortium Stroke Therapy Academic Industry Roundtable (STAIR) Recommendations for Extended Window Acute Stroke Therapy Trials Stroke, July 1, 2009; 40(7): 2594 - 2600. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Mandava and T. A. Kent A Method to Determine Stroke Trial Success Using Multidimensional Pooled Control Functions Stroke, May 1, 2009; 40(5): 1803 - 1810. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Hallevi, A. D. Barreto, D. S. Liebeskind, M. M. Morales, S. B. Martin-Schild, A. T. Abraham, J. Gadia, J. L. Saver, the UCLA Intra-Arterial Therapy Investigators, J. C. Grotta, et al. Identifying Patients at High Risk for Poor Outcome After Intra-Arterial Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke Stroke, May 1, 2009; 40(5): 1780 - 1785. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. M. Meyers, H. C. Schumacher, R. T. Higashida, S. L. Barnwell, M. A. Creager, R. Gupta, C. G. McDougall, D. K. Pandey, D. Sacks, and L. R. Wechsler Indications for the Performance of Intracranial Endovascular Neurointerventional Procedures: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, Interdisciplinary Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Interdisciplinary Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Circulation, April 28, 2009; 119(16): 2235 - 2249. [Full Text] [PDF]

				T.C. Burns, G.J. Rodriguez, S. Patel, H.M. Hussein, A.L. Georgiadis, K. Lakshminarayan, and A.I. Qureshi Endovascular Interventions following Intravenous Thrombolysis May Improve Survival and Recovery in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Case-Control Study AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., November 1, 2008; 29(10): 1918 - 1924. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. A. Kent and P. Mandava Recanalization Rates Can Be Misleading Stroke, October 1, 2007; 38(10): e103 - e103. [Full Text] [PDF]