Mismatch Vs No Mismatch in Large Core—A Matter of Definition

Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) has shown promise in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for large ischemic core stroke patients, yet variability in core definition and onset-to-imaging time creates heterogeneity in outcomes. This study aims to clarify the prevalence and implications of core-perfusi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical neuroradiology (Munich) 2024-11
Hauptverfasser: Yedavalli, Vivek, Adel Salim, Hamza, Lakhani, Dhairya A., Mei, Janet, Balar, Aneri, Musmar, Basel, Adeeb, Nimer, Hoseinyazdi, Meisam, Luna, Licia, Deng, Francis, Hyson, Nathan Z., Dmytriw, Adam A., Guenego, Adrien, Lu, Hanzhang, Urrutia, Victor C., Nael, Kambiz, Marsh, Elisabeth B., Llinas, Raf, Hillis, Argye E., Wintermark, Max, Faizy, Tobias D., Heit, Jeremy J., Albers, Gregory W.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) has shown promise in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for large ischemic core stroke patients, yet variability in core definition and onset-to-imaging time creates heterogeneity in outcomes. This study aims to clarify the prevalence and implications of core-perfusion mismatch (MM) versus no mismatch (No MM) in such patients, utilizing established imaging criteria.BACKGROUNDEndovascular thrombectomy (EVT) has shown promise in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for large ischemic core stroke patients, yet variability in core definition and onset-to-imaging time creates heterogeneity in outcomes. This study aims to clarify the prevalence and implications of core-perfusion mismatch (MM) versus no mismatch (No MM) in such patients, utilizing established imaging criteria.A retrospective cohort study was conducted including patients from 7/29/2019 to 1/29/2023, with data extracted from a continuously maintained database. Patients were eligible if they met criteria including multimodal CT imaging performed within 24 h from last known well (LKW), AIS-LVO diagnosis, and ischemic core size defined by specific rCBF thresholds. Mismatch was assessed based on different operational definitions from the EXTEND and DEFUSE 3 trials.METHODSA retrospective cohort study was conducted including patients from 7/29/2019 to 1/29/2023, with data extracted from a continuously maintained database. Patients were eligible if they met criteria including multimodal CT imaging performed within 24 h from last known well (LKW), AIS-LVO diagnosis, and ischemic core size defined by specific rCBF thresholds. Mismatch was assessed based on different operational definitions from the EXTEND and DEFUSE 3 trials.Fifty-two patients were included, with various time windows from LKW. Using EXTEND criteria, a significant portion of early window patients exhibited MM; however, fewer patients met MM criteria in the late window. Defining MM using DEFUSE 3 criteria yielded similar patterns, but with overall lower MM prevalence in the late window. When employing rCBF
ISSN:1869-1439
1869-1447
1869-1447
DOI:10.1007/s00062-024-01470-8