Endovascular versus medical therapy for large-vessel anterior occlusive stroke presenting with mild symptoms.

BACKGROUND

Acute ischemic stroke patients with a large-vessel occlusion but mild symptoms (NIHSS ≤ 6) pose a treatment dilemma between medical management and endovascular thrombectomy.

AIMS

To evaluate the differences in clinical outcomes of endovascular thrombectomy-eligible patients with target-mismatch perfusion profiles who undergo either medical management or endovascular thrombectomy.

METHODS

Forty-seven patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large-vessel occlusion, NIHSS ≤ 6, and a target-mismatch perfusion imaging profile were included. Patients underwent medical management or endovascular thrombectomy following treating neurointerventionalist and neurologist consensus. The primary outcome measure was NIHSS shift. Secondary outcome measures were symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, in-hospital mortality, and 90-day mRS scores. The primary intention-to-treat and as-treated analyses were compared to determine the impact of crossover patient allocation on study outcome measures.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients were included. Thirty underwent medical management (64%) and 17 underwent endovascular thrombectomy (36%). Three medical management patients underwent endovascular thrombectomy due to early clinical deterioration. Presentation NIHSS (

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular thrombectomy may pose an unfavorable risk-benefit profile over medical management for endovascular thrombectomy-eligible acute ischemic stroke patients with mild symptoms, which warrants a randomized trial in this subpopulation.