Abstract
Introduction: Susceptibility-Eeighted Imaging (SWI) enables visualization of thrombotic material in acute ischemic stroke. We analyzed the association between thrombus length on SWI and the success rate of recanalization in stent-retriever mechanical thrombectomy.
Methods: A retrospective study was performed on 128 patients with Middle Cerebral Artery (MCA) thrombus on pretreatment SWI. The patients were divided into 2 groups, the successful recanalization and the failed recanalization group. Thrombus visibility and location on SWI were compared to those on Maximum Intensity Projection (MIP) in Computed Tomography (CT) angiography. A comparative analysis was performed in terms of clinical and radiologic outcomes as well as complications with respect to multiple categories.
Results: No significant differences were noted in terms of baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes between the 2 groups. However, compared with the successful recanalization group, the failed recanalization group had a larger number of stent-retriever passages and a longer thrombus length (p = 0.027 and 0.014, respectively). Multivariate analyses revealed that a larger mean number of stent-retriever passages was a predictive factor for failure of recanalization (odds ratio [OR] 1.60; 95% confidence Interval [CI] 1.12-2.08; p = 0.04). Thrombus length (OR 9.91; 95% CI 3.89-13.87; p < 0.001) and atrial fibrillation (OR 5.38; 95% CI 1.51-9.58; p = 0.008) were separately associated with more than 3 stent-retriever passages.
Conclusion: Thrombus length has been identified as a predictor of recanalization failure in mechanical thrombectomy. A significant decline in the success rate of recanalization was associated with longer thrombus length.
Keywords: Mechanical thrombectomy, thrombus length, susceptibility-weighted imaging, failed recanalization, 3 stent-retriever passages, maximum intensity projection.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1411587] [PMID: 25517348]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1414792] [PMID: 25671797]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1414905] [PMID: 25671798]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1503780] [PMID: 25882510]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5853/jos.2017.00752] [PMID: 28592779]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.0000258112.14918.24] [PMID: 17272772]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.0000257304.21967.ba] [PMID: 17290031]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.030334] [PMID: 32684141]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.609693] [PMID: 21474810]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00062-019-00841-w] [PMID: 31602486]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2322030273] [PMID: 15215546]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2020.105245]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10140-020-01754-9] [PMID: 31955315]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0076727] [PMID: 24146915]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.521054] [PMID: 18772444]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ene.12509] [PMID: 25040586]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00415-012-6472-z] [PMID: 22460586]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000354848] [PMID: 24163686]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.0000021001.18101.A5] [PMID: 12154264]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.79.4.920] [PMID: 2494006]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.001026] [PMID: 23704103]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012721] [PMID: 28044009]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.0000185932.73486.7a] [PMID: 16224077]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijs.12373] [PMID: 25319168]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0063459] [PMID: 23717426]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A1400] [PMID: 19039041]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2008.04.022] [PMID: 19070701]