Study Criteria Applied to Real Life—A Multicenter Analysis of Stroke Patients Undergoing Endovascular Treatment in Clinical Practice

Background Randomized controlled clinical trials (RCT) have demonstrated the efficacy of endovascular treatment in anterior circulation large vessel occlusions. However, outcome of patients treated in daily practice differs from the results of the clinical trials. We hypothesize that this is attributable to the study criteria and that application of the criteria on patients undergoing endovascular therapy in daily routine would improve their outcome. Methods and Results Data from a multicenter prospective registry of GSR-ET (German Stroke Registry - Endovascular Treatment) was used. Inclusion criteria and selectivity of SWIFT-PRIME (Solitaire with the Intention for Thrombectomy as Primary Endovascular Treatment trial), MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands trial), ESCAPE (Endovascular Treatment for Small Core and Anterior Circulation Proximal Occlusion with Emphasis on Minimizing CT to Recanalization Times trial), DAWN (DWI or CTP Assessment with Clinical Mismatch in the Triage of Wake-Up and Late Presenting Strokes Undergoing Neurointervention with Trevo trial) and DEFUSE-3 (Endovascular Therapy Following Imaging Evaluation for Ischemic Stroke trial) trials were analyzed. Baseline characteristics, procedural and outcome data of patients from GSR-ET before and after selection were compared with the results of the RCTs. Furthermore, outcome of patients who underwent endovascular treatment despite not fulfilling the RCT criteria was analyzed. A total of 2611 patients were included (median age, 75 years; 49.6% women; median National Institute of Health Stroke Scale, 16). A minority of patients met all inclusion criteria, ranging from 3% (DEFUSE-3 criteria) to 35% (MR CLEAN criteria). Of the patients fulfilling the MR CLEAN criteria, 41% of patients had a good clinical outcome, compared with 34% of patients that did not fulfill MR CLEAN criteria. Conclusions The RCTs represent a selected population with higher rates of good clinical outcome compared with daily practice. The good outcomes of RCTs can be reproduced in clinical routine in patients who fulfill the RCT inclusion criteria. Furthermore, patients who did not meet the criteria of the RCT still had substantial rates of good clinical outcome.

[1]  J. Grotta,et al.  Impact of Initial Imaging Protocol on Likelihood of Endovascular Stroke Therapy , 2020, Stroke.

[2]  Helge Kniep,et al.  Predictors of poor clinical outcome despite complete reperfusion in acute ischemic stroke patients , 2020, Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery.

[3]  C. Gerloff,et al.  Stroke patients treated by thrombectomy in real life differ from cohorts of the clinical trials: a prospective observational study , 2020, BMC Neurology.

[4]  J. Cha,et al.  Hospital Volume Threshold Associated with Higher Survival after Endovascular Recanalization Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke , 2020, Journal of stroke.

[5]  C. Gerloff,et al.  Functional Outcome Following Stroke Thrombectomy in Clinical Practice. , 2019, Stroke.

[6]  M. Mazighi,et al.  European Stroke Organisation (ESO)- European Society for Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy (ESMINT) guidelines on mechanical thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke , 2019, Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery.

[7]  K. S. Lange,et al.  Systematic evaluation of stroke thrombectomy in clinical practice: The German Stroke Registry Endovascular Treatment , 2018, International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society.

[8]  Heather B. Roesly Thrombectomy for Stroke at 6 to 16 Hours with Selection by Perfusion Imaging , 2018, The Journal of Emergency Medicine.

[9]  A. Mpotsaris,et al.  Mechanical Thrombectomy—A Brief Review of a Revolutionary new Treatment for Thromboembolic Stroke , 2018, Clinical Neuroradiology.

[10]  J. Mocco,et al.  A multicenter study of the safety and effectiveness of mechanical thrombectomy for patients with acute ischemic stroke not meeting top-tier evidence criteria , 2017, Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery.

[11]  A. Demchuk,et al.  Endovascular thrombectomy after large-vessel ischaemic stroke: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from five randomised trials , 2016, The Lancet.

[12]  A. Alexandrov,et al.  Implications of limiting mechanical thrombectomy to patients with emergent large vessel occlusion meeting top tier evidence criteria , 2016, Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery.

[13]  J. Johnston,et al.  A literature review on the representativeness of randomized controlled trial samples and implications for the external validity of trial results , 2015, Trials.

[14]  A. Demchuk,et al.  Thrombectomy within 8 hours after symptom onset in ischemic stroke. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  H. Diener,et al.  Stent-retriever thrombectomy after intravenous t-PA vs. t-PA alone in stroke. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  M. Krause,et al.  Endovascular therapy for ischemic stroke with perfusion-imaging selection. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  Eric E. Smith,et al.  Randomized assessment of rapid endovascular treatment of ischemic stroke. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  Hester F. Lingsma,et al.  A randomized trial of intraarterial treatment for acute ischemic stroke. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[19]  J. M. Gordon HOSPITAL VOLUME AND STROKE OUTCOME: DOES IT MATTER? , 2007, Neurology.

[20]  V. Hachinski,et al.  Hospital volume and stroke outcome , 2007, Neurology.

[21]  P. Rothwell,et al.  External validity of randomised controlled trials: “To whom do the results of this trial apply?” , 2005, The Lancet.