Deans' stroke musings: Hyperdense vessel sign as a potential guide for the choice of stent retriever versus contact aspiration as first-line thrombectomy strategy

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Saturday, August 1, 2020

Hyperdense vessel sign as a potential guide for the choice of stent retriever versus contact aspiration as first-line thrombectomy strategy

Where the fuck is the preliminary protocol on this while you lazily didn't do your job well enough and had to call for further studies?

Hyperdense vessel sign as a potential guide for the choice of stent retriever versus contact aspiration as first-line thrombectomy strategy

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7393-9989Mahmoud H Mohammaden1,2,
Diogo C Haussen1,2,
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9353-1219Catarina Perry da Camara1,2,
Leonardo Pisani1,2,
Marta Olive Gadea1,2,
Alhamza R Al-Bayati1,2,
Bernardo Liberato1,2,
Srikant Rangaraju1,2,
Michael R Frankel1,2,
Raul G Nogueira1,2

Author affiliations

Abstract

Background The first-pass effect (FPE) has emerged as a key metric for efficacy in mechanical thrombectomy (MT). The hyperdense vessel sign (HDVS) on non-contrast head CT (NCCT) indicates a higher clot content of red blood cells.

Objective To assess whether the HDVS could serve as an imaging biomarker for guiding first-line device selection in MT.

Methods A prospective MT database was reviewed for consecutive patients with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion stroke who underwent thrombectomy with stent retriever (SR) or contact aspiration (CA) as first-line therapy between January 2012 and November 2018. Pretreatment NCCT scans were evaluated for the presence of HDVS. The primary outcome was FPE (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score 2c/3). The primary analysis was the interaction between HDVS and thrombectomy modality on FPE. Secondary analyses aimed to evaluate the predictors of FPE.

Results A total of 779 patients qualified for the analysis. HDVS and FPE were reported in 473 (60.7%) and 286 (36.7%) patients, respectively. The presence of HDVS significantly modified the effect of thrombectomy modality on FPE (p=0.01), with patients with HDVS having a significantly higher rate of FPE with a SR (41.3% vs 22.2%, p=0.001; adjusted OR 2.11 (95% CI 1.20 to 3.70), p=0.009) and non-HDVS patients having a numerically better response to CA (41.4% vs 33.9%, p=0.28; adjusted OR 0.58 (95% CI 0.311 to 1.084), p=0.088). Age (OR 1.01 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.02), p=0.04) and balloon guide catheter (OR 2.08 (95% CI 1.24 to 3.47), p=0.005) were independent predictors of FPE in the overall population.

Conclusion Our data suggest that patients with HDVS may have a better response to SRs than CA for the FPE. Larger confirmatory prospective studies are warranted.

View Full Text

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-016005