Circle of Willis variation and outcome after intra-arterial treatment.
CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASE
STROKE
Journal
BMJ neurology open
ISSN: 2632-6140
Titre abrégé: BMJ Neurol Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101775450
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
26
06
2022
accepted:
08
09
2022
entrez:
26
9
2022
pubmed:
27
9
2022
medline:
27
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Intra-arterial treatment (IAT) improves outcomes in acute ischaemic stroke. Presence of collaterals increases likelihood of good outcome. We investigated whether variations in the circle of Willis (CoW) and contributing carotid arteries influence outcome in patients who had a stroke treated with IAT. CT angiography data on patients who had an acute stroke treated with IAT were retrospectively collected. CoW was regarded complete if the contralateral A1 segment, anterior communicating artery and ipsilateral posterior communicating artery were fully developed, and the P1 segment was visible. Carotid artery contribution was studied with a self-developed carotid artery score ranging from 0 to 2 depending on the number of arteries supplying the occluded side of the CoW. Good clinical outcome was defined as modified Rankin Score ≤2 and measured at discharge and 3 months. We calculated risk ratios for the relation between completeness of the CoW, carotid score and good outcome, and performed a trend analysis for good outcome according to the carotid score. 126 patients were included for analysis. Patients with a complete and incomplete CoW had a comparable risk for good outcome at discharge and 3 months. A higher carotid score was associated with a higher likelihood of good clinical outcome (p for trend 0.24 at discharge and 0.05 at 3 months). In patients with acute ischaemic stroke treated with IAT, chances of good clinical outcome tended to improve with number of carotid arteries supplying the cerebral circulation. Completeness of the CoW was not related to clinical outcome.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Intra-arterial treatment (IAT) improves outcomes in acute ischaemic stroke. Presence of collaterals increases likelihood of good outcome. We investigated whether variations in the circle of Willis (CoW) and contributing carotid arteries influence outcome in patients who had a stroke treated with IAT.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
CT angiography data on patients who had an acute stroke treated with IAT were retrospectively collected. CoW was regarded complete if the contralateral A1 segment, anterior communicating artery and ipsilateral posterior communicating artery were fully developed, and the P1 segment was visible. Carotid artery contribution was studied with a self-developed carotid artery score ranging from 0 to 2 depending on the number of arteries supplying the occluded side of the CoW. Good clinical outcome was defined as modified Rankin Score ≤2 and measured at discharge and 3 months. We calculated risk ratios for the relation between completeness of the CoW, carotid score and good outcome, and performed a trend analysis for good outcome according to the carotid score.
Results
UNASSIGNED
126 patients were included for analysis. Patients with a complete and incomplete CoW had a comparable risk for good outcome at discharge and 3 months. A higher carotid score was associated with a higher likelihood of good clinical outcome (p for trend 0.24 at discharge and 0.05 at 3 months).
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
In patients with acute ischaemic stroke treated with IAT, chances of good clinical outcome tended to improve with number of carotid arteries supplying the cerebral circulation. Completeness of the CoW was not related to clinical outcome.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36160689
doi: 10.1136/bmjno-2022-000340
pii: bmjno-2022-000340
pmc: PMC9490629
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e000340Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Neurology. 2003 May 13;60(9):1435-41
pubmed: 12743227
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 11;372(24):2285-95
pubmed: 25882376
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017 Dec;38(12):2270-2276
pubmed: 29025724
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014 May;35(5):884-90
pubmed: 24371030
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009 Mar;30(3):525-31
pubmed: 19147716
N Engl J Med. 2015 Mar 12;372(11):1009-18
pubmed: 25671797
Stroke. 2001 Dec 1;32(12):2768-73
pubmed: 11739971
Stroke. 2015 Dec;46(12):3398-404
pubmed: 26542691
Stroke. 1988 May;19(5):604-7
pubmed: 3363593
Front Neurol. 2014 Dec 05;5:254
pubmed: 25538674
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 11;372(24):2296-306
pubmed: 25882510
Stroke. 1994 Oct;25(10):1963-7
pubmed: 7916501
Stroke. 2004 Jun;35(6):1345-9
pubmed: 15118172
Int J Stroke. 2008 Nov;3(4):230-6
pubmed: 18811738
Stroke. 2003 Aug;34(8):e109-37
pubmed: 12869717
Brain Behav. 2019 Dec;9(12):e01452
pubmed: 31696661
Scott Med J. 1957 May;2(5):200-15
pubmed: 13432835
Stroke. 1999 Jul;30(7):1432-9
pubmed: 10390319
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2018;45(1-2):10-17
pubmed: 29208850
Stroke Vasc Neurol. 2021 Jun;6(2):310-313
pubmed: 33046661
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jan 1;372(1):11-20
pubmed: 25517348
N Engl J Med. 2015 Mar 12;372(11):1019-30
pubmed: 25671798
Brain. 2013 Dec;136(Pt 12):3554-60
pubmed: 24065722
Stroke. 2000 Jan;31(1):128-32
pubmed: 10625727
Lancet. 2000 May 13;355(9216):1670-4
pubmed: 10905241
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2015 Apr;131:72-6
pubmed: 25710708
Stroke. 2013 Dec;44(12):3394-400
pubmed: 24135929
Stroke. 1987 Mar-Apr;18(2):407-11
pubmed: 3564097
CMAJ. 2012 May 15;184(8):895-9
pubmed: 22158397
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2011;31(2):177-84
pubmed: 21135554
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014 Apr;35(4):667-72
pubmed: 24481331
Stroke. 2016 Mar;47(3):768-76
pubmed: 26903582
Lancet. 2016 Apr 23;387(10029):1723-31
pubmed: 26898852