Predictors and outcomes of intraprocedural rupture in patients treated for ruptured intracranial aneurysms: The CARAT study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE-: Intraprocedural rupture (IPR) is a well known complication of intracranial aneurysm treatment. Risks and predictors of IPR and its impact on outcome have not been clearly established. METHODS-: Potential predictors of IPR were evaluated in patients treated in the Cerebral Aneurysm Rerupture After Treatment (CARAT) study using multivariate logistic regression with stepwise elimination stratified by treatment modality. Periprocedural death or disability was defined as death or a change of ≥2 points on the Modified Rankin Scale at discharge compared to before treatment. RESULTS-: IPR occurred in 14.6% of 1010 patients (299 coiled, 711 clipped): 19% with clipping and 5% with coiling (P\u3c0.001). Among those clipped, 31% with IPR had periprocedural death or disability compared to 18% without IPR (P=0.001); among those coiled, 63% with IPR had periprocedural death or disability compared to 15% without IPR (P\u3c0.001). Overall, coronary artery disease and initial lower Hunt and Hess Grade were independent predictors of IPR. For those undergoing coiling, independent predictors of IPR were Asian race, black race, COPD, and lower initial Hunt and Hess Grade. Among those undergoing clipping, hyperlipidemia and lower initial Hunt and Hess Grade were both independent predictors of IPR. CONCLUSIONS-: IPR was common in patients undergoing treatment of ruptured aneurysms, particularly with surgical clipping. The frequency of IPR with new disability was similar in the surgical and endovascular treatment groups. Coronary artery disease, hyperlipidemia, race, COPD, and lower Hunt and Hess Grade were associated with greater risk of IPR, which may reflect differences in vessel fragility but requires further confirmation. © 2008 American Heart Association, Inc

Sulfonylurea pretreatment and in-hospital use does not impact acute ischemic strokes (AIS) outcomes following intravenous thrombolysis

Background and Purpose: Preliminary studies have indicated that sulfonylurea drugs (SUD) may confer protection against cerebral swelling and hemorrhagic transformation in severe acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We sought to determine whether pretreatment and in-hospital use of SUD may be associated with better outcomes in diabetic AIS patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT). Subjects and Methods: We analyzed consecutive diabetic AIS patients treated with IVT during a 3-year period. Pretreatment with SUD, admission NIHSS (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale) score, NIHSS at 48 hours, and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at discharge were documented. Patients who discontinued SUD during hospitalization were excluded. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) was defined as imaging evidence of ICH with NIHSS score increase of greater than or equal to 4 points within 72 hours. Early neurological improvement was defined as an NIHSS score decrease of greater than or equal to 4 points or NIHSS score of 0 at 48 hours. Cerebral edema was documented by neuroradiology reports. Favorable functional outcome (FFO) was defined as discharge mRS of 0-1. Results: A total of 148 diabetic AIS patients were evaluated (mean age 64 ± 11 years, 49% men, median admission NIHSS score: 8 points). We identified 42 (28%) cases pretreated with SUD. The prevalence of complications and favorable outcomes did not differ (P > .1) between patients pretreated and nonpretreated with SUD: sICH (2% versus 5%), cerebral edema (5% versus 4%), early neurological improvement (42% versus 43%), in-hospital mortality (12% versus 5%), and FFO (22% versus 32%). Conclusions: Pretreatment and in-hospital use of SUD appears not to be associated with early favorable outcomes and lower likelihood of potential complications in diabetic AIS patients treated with IVT

How to WEB: a practical review of methodology for the use of the Woven EndoBridge.

Wide-necked bifurcation aneurysms (WNBAs) make up 26-36% of all brain aneurysms. Treatments for WNBAs pose unique challenges due to the need to preserve major bifurcation vessels while achieving a durable occlusion of the aneurysm. Intrasaccular flow disruption is an innovative technique for the treatment of WNBAs. The Woven EndoBridge (WEB) device is the only United States Food and Drug Administration approved intrasaccular flow disruption device. In this review article we discuss various aspects of treating WNBAs with the WEB device, including indications for use, aneurysm/device selection strategies, antiplatelet therapy requirement, procedural technique, potential complications and bailouts, and management strategies for residual/recurrent aneurysms after initial WEB treatment

Implications of limiting mechanical thrombectomy to patients with emergent large vessel occlusion meeting top tier evidence criteria

Background: Recent guidelines for endovascular management of emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO) award top tier evidence to the same selective criteria in recent trials. We aimed to understand how guideline adherence would have impacted treatment numbers and outcomes in a cohort of patients from a comprehensive stroke center. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted using consecutive emergent endovascular patients. Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) was performed with stent retrievers or large bore clot aspiration catheters. Procedural outcomes were compared between patients meeting, and those failing to meet, top tier evidence criteria. Results: 126 patients receiving MT from January 2012 to June 2015 were included (age 31–89 years, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score 2–38); 62 (49%) patients would have been excluded if top tier criteria were upheld: pretreatment NIHSS score 360 min (58%). 26 (42%) subjects had more than one top tier exclusion. Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) and systemic hemorrhage rates were similar between the groups. 3 month mortality was 45% in those lacking top tier evidence compared with 26% (p=0.044), and 3 month mRS score 0–2 was 33% versus 46%, respectively (NS). After adjusting for potential confounders, top tier treatment was not associated with neurological improvement during hospitalization (β −8.2; 95% CI −24.6 to −8.2; p=0.321), 3 month mortality (OR=0.38; 95% CI 0.08 to 1.41), or 3 month favorable mRS (OR=0.97; 95% CI 0.28 to 3.35). Conclusions: Our study showed that with strict adherence to top tier evidence criteria, half of patients may not be considered for MT. Our data indicate no increased risk of sICH and a potentially higher mortality that is largely due to treatment of patients with basilar occlusions and those treated at an extended time window. Despite this, good functional recovery is possible, and consideration of MT in patients not meeting top tier evidence criteria may be warranted