Seong Hwa Jang

Background and ObjectivesCraniocervical artery dissection (CCAD) is a major cause of stroke in young adults, yet its recurrence risk remains poorly defined because of delayed enrollment in prior re...

Kwon DH, et al. J Korean Med Sci. 2022 May;37(19):e156. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2022.37.e156

Background The underlying etiology of intracranial non-occlusive intraluminal thrombus (iNOT) remains unknown. This study aimed to investigate whether the presence of iNOT can indicate the underlying etiology of large vessel occlusion (LVO) in patients undergoing endovascular therapy (EVT). Methods Among patients who underwent EVT at three comprehensive stroke centers, we included those with intracranial LVO in the anterior circulation. The presence of iNOT was determined by pretreatment DSA. We investigated the association between iNOT and intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) related LVO. Results Of 546 patients, 44 (8.1%) had iNOT. Patients with iNOT were younger, had less hypertension, atrial fibrillation, and a history of antiplatelet use. In addition, the involvement of the M1 segment of the middle cerebral artery (MCA) was more frequent. However, they had a lower National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score on admission and longer onset to recanalization time compared with patients with no iNOT. In a logistic regression model adjusting for age, sex, atrial fibrillation, smoking, prior antiplatelet and anticoagulant use, intravenous tissue plasminogen activator, NIHSS on admission, number of technical trials, intraprocedural re-occlusion, and the location of LVO (pConclusions The presence of iNOT may reflect an underlying ICAS related LVO in patients undergoing EVT.

The safety and efficacy of tirofiban during endovascular therapy in patients undergoing intravenous thrombolysis with recombinant IV tPA remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of intra-arterial tirofiban use during endovascular therapy in patients treated with IV tPA. Using a multicenter registry, we enrolled patients with acute ischemic stroke who underwent endovascular therapy. Safety outcomes included postprocedural parenchymal hematoma type 2 and/or thick subarachnoid hemorrhage, intraventricular hemorrhage, and 3-month mortality. Efficacy outcomes included the successful reperfusion rate, postprocedural reocclusion, and good outcomes at 3 months (mRS scores of 0-2). The tirofiban effect on the outcomes was evaluated using a multivariable analysis while adjusting for potential confounders. Among enrolled patients, we identified 314 patients with stroke (279 and 35 patients in the no tirofiban and tirofiban groups, respectively) due to an intracranial artery occlusion who underwent endovascular therapy with intravenous thrombolysis. A multivariable analysis revealed no association of intra-arterial tirofiban with postprocedural parenchymal hematoma type and/or thick subarachnoid hemorrhage (adjusted OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.20-4.10; P = .918), intraventricular hemorrhage (adjusted OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.02-2.85; P = .467), and 3-month mortality (adjusted OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.04-1.87; P = .299). Intra-arterial tirofiban was not associated with good outcome (adjusted OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 0.89 -6.12; P = .099). Using intra-arterial tirofiban during endovascular therapy after IV tPA could be safe.