BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Few studies assess nonstenotic carotid plaques on CTA, and the causative role of these plaques in stroke is not entirely clear. We used CTA to determine the prevalence of nonstenotic carotid plaques (<50%), plaque features, and their association with ipsilateral strokes in patients with cardioembolic and cryptogenic strokes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were from the Systematic Evaluation of Patients Treated With Neurothrombectomy Devices for Acute Ischemic Stroke (STRATIS) registry, a prospective, nonrandomized registry of patients undergoing thrombectomy with the Solitaire device. The prevalence of nonstenotic carotid plaques ipsilateral and contralateral to the stroke was compared in patients with cryptogenic and cardioembolic strokes. Plaque features were further compared within both subgroups between patients with and without ipsilateral stroke. Adjusted associations among nonstenotic carotid plaque, plaque characteristics, and ipsilateral stroke in both subgroups were determined with logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 946 patients in the data base, 226 patients with cardioembolic stroke (median age, 72 years) and 141 patients with cryptogenic stroke (median age, 69 years) were included in the analysis. The prevalence of nonstenotic carotid plaque in the cardioembolic and cryptogenic subgroups was 33/226 (14.6%) and 32/141 (22.7%), respectively. Bilateral nonstenotic carotid plaques were seen in 10/226 (4.4%) patients with cardioembolic and 13/141 (9.2%) with cryptogenic strokes. Nonstenotic carotid plaques were significantly associated with ipsilateral strokes in the cardioembolic stroke (adjusted OR = 1.91; 95% CI, 1.15-3.18) and the cryptogenic stroke (adjusted OR = 1.69; 95% CI, 1.05-2.73) groups. Plaque irregularity, hypodensity, and per-millimeter increase in plaque thickness were significantly associated with ipsilateral stroke in the cryptogenic subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Nonstenotic carotid plaques were significantly associated with ipsilateral stroke in cardioembolic and cryptogenic stroke groups, and there was an association of plaque irregularity and hypodense plaque with ipsilateral stroke in the cryptogenic group, suggesting these plaques could be a potential cause of stroke in these patient subgroups.

Background and purpose

Mechanical thrombectomy is beneficial for patients with acute ischemic stroke and a proximal anterior occlusion, but it is unclear if these results can be extrapolated to patients with an M2 occlusion. The purpose of this study was to examine the technical aspects, safety, and outcomes of mechanical thrombectomy with a stent retriever in patients with an isolated M2 occlusion who were included in 3 large multicenter prospective studies.

Materials and methods

We included patients from the Solitaire Flow Restoration Thrombectomy for Acute Revascularization (STAR), Solitaire With the Intention For Thrombectomy (SWIFT), and Solitaire With the Intention for Thrombectomy as Primary Endovascular Treatment (SWIFT PRIME) studies, 3 large multicenter prospective studies on thrombectomy for ischemic stroke. We compared outcomes and technical details of patients with an M2 with those with an M1 occlusion. All patients were treated with a stent retriever. Imaging data and outcomes were scored by an independent core laboratory. Successful reperfusion was defined as modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score of 2b/3.

Results

We included 50 patients with an M2 and 249 patients with an M1 occlusion. Patients with an M2 occlusion were older (mean age, 71 versus 67 years; P = .04) and had a lower NIHSS score (median, 13 versus 17; P < .001) compared with those with an M1 occlusion. Procedural time was nonsignificantly shorter in patients with an M2 occlusion (median, 29 versus 35 minutes; P = .41). The average number of passes with a stent retriever was also nonsignificantly lower in patients with an M2 occlusion (mean, 1.4 versus 1.7; P = .07). There were no significant differences in successful reperfusion (85% versus 82%, P = .82), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhages (2% versus 2%, P = 1.0), device-related serious adverse events (6% versus 4%, P = .46), or modified Rankin Scale score 0-2 at follow-up (60% versus 56%, P = .64).

Conclusions

Endovascular reperfusion therapy appears to be feasible in selected patients with ischemic stroke and an M2 occlusion.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Uncertainty persists regarding the safety and efficacy of endovascular therapy of M2 occlusions following IV tPA. We reviewed the impact of revascularization on clinical outcomes in 83 patients with M2 occlusions in the Interventional Management of Stroke III trial according to specific M1-M2 segment anatomic features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Perfusion of any M2 branch distinguished M2-versus-M1 occlusion. Prespecified modified TICI and arterial occlusive lesion revascularization and clinical mRS 0-2 end points at 90 days for endovascular therapy-treated M2 occlusions were analyzed. Post hoc analyses of the relationship of outcomes to multiple baseline angiographic M2 and M1 subgroup characteristics were performed. RESULTS: Of 83 participants with M2 occlusion who underwent endovascular therapy, 41.0% achieved mRS 0-2 at 90 days, including 46.6% with modified TICI 2-3 reperfusion compared with 26.1% with modified TICI 0-1 reperfusion (risk difference, 20.6%; 95% CI, -1.4%-42.5%). mRS 0-2 outcome was associated with reperfusion for M2 trunk (n = 9) or M2 division (n = 42) occlusions, but not for M2 branch occlusions (n = 28). Of participants with trunk and division occlusions, 63.2% with modified TICI 2a and 42.9% with modified TICI 2b reperfusion achieved mRS 0-2 outcomes; mRS 0-2 outcomes for M2 trunk occlusions (33%) did not differ from distal (38.2%) and proximal (26.9%) M1 occlusions. CONCLUSIONS: mRS 0-2 at 90 days was dependent on reperfusion for M2 trunk but not for M2 branch occlusions. For M2 division occlusions, good outcome with modified TICI 2b reperfusion did not differ from that in modified TICI 2a. M2 segment definition and occlusion location may contribute to differences in revascularization and good outcome between Interventional Management of Stroke III and other endovascular therapy studies.

Background and purpose

Intracarotid arterial infusion of nonionic, low-osmolal iohexol contrast medium has been associated with increased intracranial hemorrhage in a rat middle cerebral artery occlusion model compared with saline infusion. Iso-osmolal iodixanol (290 mOsm/kg H2O) infusion demonstrated smaller infarcts and less intracranial hemorrhage compared with low-osmolal iopamidol and saline. No studies comparing iodinated radiographic contrast media in human stroke have been performed, to our knowledge. We hypothesized that low-osmolal contrast media may be associated with worse outcomes compared with iodixanol in the Interventional Management of Stroke III Trial (IMS III).

Materials and methods

We reviewed prospective iodinated radiographic contrast media data for 133 M1 occlusions treated with endovascular therapy. We compared 5 prespecified efficacy and safety end points (mRS 0-2 outcome, modified TICI 2b-3 reperfusion, asymptomatic and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and mortality) between those receiving iodixanol (n = 31) or low-osmolal contrast media (n = 102). Variables imbalanced between iodinated radiographic contrast media types or associated with outcome were considered potential covariates for the adjusted models. In addition to the iodinated radiographic contrast media type, final covariates were those selected by using the stepwise method in a logistic regression model. Adjusted relative risks were then estimated by using a log-link regression model.

Results

Of baseline or endovascular therapy variables potentially linked to outcome, prior antiplatelet agent use was more common and microcatheter iodinated radiographic contrast media injections were fewer with iodixanol. Relative risk point estimates are in favor of iodixanol for the 5 prespecified end points with M1 occlusion. The percentage of risk differences are numerically greater for microcatheter injections with iodixanol.

Conclusions

While data favoring the use of iso-osmolal iodixanol for reperfusion of M1 occlusion following IV rtPA are inconclusive, potential pathophysiologic mechanisms suggesting clinical benefit warrant further investigation.

Background and purpose

Patient selection for endovascular therapy remains a great challenge in clinic practice. We sought to determine the effect of baseline CT and angiography on outcomes in the Solitaire With the Intention for Thrombectomy as Primary Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke (SWIFT PRIME) trial and to identify patients who would benefit from endovascular stroke therapy.

Materials and methods

The primary end point was a 90-day modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2. Subgroup and classification and regression tree analysis was performed on baseline ASPECTS, site of occlusion, clot length, collateral status, and onset-to-treatment time.

Results

Smaller baseline infarct (n = 145) (ASPECTS 8-10) was associated with better outcomes in patients treated with thrombectomy versus IV tPA alone (66% versus 41%; rate ratio, 1.62) compared with patients with larger baseline infarcts (n = 44) (ASPECTS 6-7) (42% versus 21%; rate ratio, 1.98). The benefit of thrombectomy over IV tPA alone did not differ significantly by ASPECTS. Stratification by occlusion location also showed benefit with thrombectomy across all groups. Improved outcomes after thrombectomy occurred in patients with clot lengths of ≥8 mm (71% versus 43%; rate ratio, 1.67). Outcomes stratified by collateral status had a benefit with thrombectomy across all groups: none-fair collaterals (33% versus 0%), good collaterals (58% versus 44%), and excellent collaterals (82% versus 28%). Using a 3-level classification and regression tree analysis, we observed optimal outcomes in patients with favorable baseline ASPECTS, complete/near-complete recanalization (TICI 2b/3), and early treatment (mean mRS, 1.35 versus 3.73), while univariate and multivariate logistic regression showed significantly better results in patients with higher ASPECTS.

Conclusions

While benefit was seen with endovascular therapy across multiple subgroups, the greatest response was observed in patients with a small baseline core infarct, excellent collaterals, and early treatment.