Cargando…
Most endovascular thrombectomy patients have Target Mismatch despite absence of formal CT perfusion selection criteria
Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is the standard of care for large vessel occlusion stroke. Use of Computed Tomographic Perfusion (CTP) to select EVT candidates is variable. The frequency of treatment and outcome in patients with unfavourable CTP patterns is unknown. A retrospective analysis of CTP u...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10501580/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37708105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0285679 |
Sumario: | Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is the standard of care for large vessel occlusion stroke. Use of Computed Tomographic Perfusion (CTP) to select EVT candidates is variable. The frequency of treatment and outcome in patients with unfavourable CTP patterns is unknown. A retrospective analysis of CTP utilisation prior to EVT was conducted. All CTP data were analysed centrally and a Target Mismatch was defined as an infarct core ≤70 ml, penumbral volume ≥15ml, and a total hypoperfused volume:core volume ratio >1.8. The primary outcome was good functional outcome at 90 days, defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 0–2. follow-up infarct volume, core expansion and penumbral salvage volumes were secondary outcomes. Of 572 anterior circulation EVT patients, CTP source image data required to generate objective maps were available in 170, and a Target Mismatch was present in 151 (89%). The rate of 90-day good functional outcome was similar between Target Mismatch (53%) and Large Core Non-Mismatch groups (46%, p = 0.629). Median follow-up infarct volume in the Large Core Non-Mismatch group (104ml [IQR 25ml-189ml]) was larger than that in the Target Mismatch patients (16ml [8ml-47ml], p<0.001). Despite a lack of formal CTP selection criteria, the majority of patients treated at our centres had a Target Mismatch. Patients without Target Mismatch had larger follow-up infarct volumes, but the functional recovery rate was similar to that in Target Mismatch patients. Infarct volumes should be included as objective assessment criteria in the evaluation of the efficacy of EVT in non-Target Mismatch patients. |
---|