Background and aim The clinical importance and management of vasospasm as a complication during endovascular stroke treatment(EVT)has not been well studied.We sought to investigate current expert opinions in neurointe...Background and aim The clinical importance and management of vasospasm as a complication during endovascular stroke treatment(EVT)has not been well studied.We sought to investigate current expert opinions in neurointervention and therapeutic strategies of iatrogenic vasospasm during EVT.Methods We conducted an anonymous international online survey(4 April 2023 to 15 May 2023)addressing treatment standards of neurointerventionalists(NIs)practising EVT.Several illustrative cases of patients with vasospasm during EVT were shown.Two study groups were compared according to the NI’s opinion regarding the potential influence of vasospasm on patient outcome after EVT using descriptive analysis.Results In total,534 NI from 56 countries responded,of whom 51.5%had performed>200 EVT.Vasospasm was considered a complication potentially influencing the patient’s outcome by 52.6%(group 1)whereas 47.4%did not(group 2).Physicians in group 1 more often added vasodilators to their catheter flushes during EVT routinely(43.7%vs 33.9%,p=0.033)and more often treated severe large-vessel vasospasm with vasodilators(75.3%vs 55.9%;p<0.001),as well as extracranial vasospasm(61.4%vs 36.5%,p<0.001)and intracranial medium-vessel vasospasm(27.1%vs 11.2%,p<0.001),compared with group 2.In case of a large-vessel vasospasm and residual and amenable medium-vessel occlusion during EVT,the study groups showed different treatment strategies.Group 2 continued the EVT immediately more often,without initiating therapy to treat the vasospasm first(9.6%vs 21.1%,p<0.001).Conclusion There is disagreement among NIs about the clinical relevance of vasospasm during EVT and its management.There was a higher likelihood of use of preventive and active vasodilator treatment in the group that perceived vasospasm as a relevant complication as well as differing interventional strategies for continuing an EVT in the presence of a large-vessel vasospasm.展开更多
Introduction The safety outcomes of endovascular therapy for intracranial artery stenosis in a real-world stetting are largely unknown.The Clinical Registration Trial of Intracranial Stenting for Patients with Symptom...Introduction The safety outcomes of endovascular therapy for intracranial artery stenosis in a real-world stetting are largely unknown.The Clinical Registration Trial of Intracranial Stenting for Patients with Symptomatic Intracranial Artery Stenosis(CRTICAS)was a prospective,multicentre,real-world registry designed to assess these outcomes and the impact of centre experience.Methods 1140 severe,symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis(ICAS)patients treated with endovascular therapy were included from 26 centres,further divided into three groups according to the annual centre volume of intracranial angioplasty and stent placement procedures over 2 years:(1)high volume for≥25 cases/year;(2)moderate volume for 10–25 cases/year and(3)low volume for<10 cases/year.Results The rate of 30-day stroke,transient ischaemic attack or death was 9.7%(111),with 5.4%,21.1%and 9.7%in high-volume,moderate-volume and low-volume centres,respectively(p<0.05).Multivariable logistic regression confirmed high-volume centres had a significantly lower primary endpoint compared with moderate-volume centres(OR=0.187,95%CI:0.056 to 0.627;p≤0.0001),while moderate-volume and low-volume centres showed no significant difference(p=0.8456).Conclusion Compared with the preceding randomised controlled trials,this real-world,prospective,multicentre registry shows a lower complication rate of endovascular treatment for symptomatic ICAS.Non-uniform utilisation in endovascular technology,institutional experience and patient selection in different volumes of centres may have an impact on overall safety of this treatment.展开更多
文摘Background and aim The clinical importance and management of vasospasm as a complication during endovascular stroke treatment(EVT)has not been well studied.We sought to investigate current expert opinions in neurointervention and therapeutic strategies of iatrogenic vasospasm during EVT.Methods We conducted an anonymous international online survey(4 April 2023 to 15 May 2023)addressing treatment standards of neurointerventionalists(NIs)practising EVT.Several illustrative cases of patients with vasospasm during EVT were shown.Two study groups were compared according to the NI’s opinion regarding the potential influence of vasospasm on patient outcome after EVT using descriptive analysis.Results In total,534 NI from 56 countries responded,of whom 51.5%had performed>200 EVT.Vasospasm was considered a complication potentially influencing the patient’s outcome by 52.6%(group 1)whereas 47.4%did not(group 2).Physicians in group 1 more often added vasodilators to their catheter flushes during EVT routinely(43.7%vs 33.9%,p=0.033)and more often treated severe large-vessel vasospasm with vasodilators(75.3%vs 55.9%;p<0.001),as well as extracranial vasospasm(61.4%vs 36.5%,p<0.001)and intracranial medium-vessel vasospasm(27.1%vs 11.2%,p<0.001),compared with group 2.In case of a large-vessel vasospasm and residual and amenable medium-vessel occlusion during EVT,the study groups showed different treatment strategies.Group 2 continued the EVT immediately more often,without initiating therapy to treat the vasospasm first(9.6%vs 21.1%,p<0.001).Conclusion There is disagreement among NIs about the clinical relevance of vasospasm during EVT and its management.There was a higher likelihood of use of preventive and active vasodilator treatment in the group that perceived vasospasm as a relevant complication as well as differing interventional strategies for continuing an EVT in the presence of a large-vessel vasospasm.
基金supported by the National Key Research and Development Project(2016YFC1301703)the Beijing Scientific and Technologic Project(D161100003816002).
文摘Introduction The safety outcomes of endovascular therapy for intracranial artery stenosis in a real-world stetting are largely unknown.The Clinical Registration Trial of Intracranial Stenting for Patients with Symptomatic Intracranial Artery Stenosis(CRTICAS)was a prospective,multicentre,real-world registry designed to assess these outcomes and the impact of centre experience.Methods 1140 severe,symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis(ICAS)patients treated with endovascular therapy were included from 26 centres,further divided into three groups according to the annual centre volume of intracranial angioplasty and stent placement procedures over 2 years:(1)high volume for≥25 cases/year;(2)moderate volume for 10–25 cases/year and(3)low volume for<10 cases/year.Results The rate of 30-day stroke,transient ischaemic attack or death was 9.7%(111),with 5.4%,21.1%and 9.7%in high-volume,moderate-volume and low-volume centres,respectively(p<0.05).Multivariable logistic regression confirmed high-volume centres had a significantly lower primary endpoint compared with moderate-volume centres(OR=0.187,95%CI:0.056 to 0.627;p≤0.0001),while moderate-volume and low-volume centres showed no significant difference(p=0.8456).Conclusion Compared with the preceding randomised controlled trials,this real-world,prospective,multicentre registry shows a lower complication rate of endovascular treatment for symptomatic ICAS.Non-uniform utilisation in endovascular technology,institutional experience and patient selection in different volumes of centres may have an impact on overall safety of this treatment.
