Background and Purpose— If anterior circulation large vessel occlusion acute ischemic stroke patients presenting with ASPECTS 0–5 (Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score) should be treated with mechanical thrombectomy remains unclear. Purpose of this study was to report on the outcome of patients with ASPECTS 0–5 treated with mechanical thrombectomy and to provide data regarding the effect of successful reperfusion on clinical outcomes and safety measures in these patients. Methods— Multicenter, pooled analysis of 7 institutional prospective registries: Bernese-European Registry for Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated Outside Current Guidelines With Neurothrombectomy Devices Using the SOLITAIRE FR With the Intention for Thrombectomy (Clinical Trial Registration—URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT03496064). Primary outcome was defined as modified Rankin Scale 0–3 at day 90 (favorable outcome). Secondary outcomes included rates of day 90 modified Rankin Scale 0–2 (functional independence), day 90 mortality and occurrence of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the association of successful reperfusion with clinical outcomes. Outputs are displayed as adjusted Odds Ratios (aOR) and 95% CI. Results— Two hundred thirty-seven of 2046 patients included in this registry presented with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion and ASPECTS 0–5. In this subgroup, the overall rates of favorable outcome and mortality at day 90 were 40.1% and 40.9%. Achieving successful reperfusion was independently associated with favorable outcome (aOR, 5.534; 95% CI, 2.363–12.961), functional independence (aOR, 5.583; 95% CI, 1.964–15.873), reduced mortality (aOR, 0.180; 95% CI, 0.083–0.390), and lower rates of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (aOR, 0.235; 95% CI, 0.062–0.887). The mortality-reducing effect remained in patients with ASPECTS 0–4 (aOR, 0.167; 95% CI, 0.056–0.499). Sensitivity analyses did not change the primary results. Conclusions— In patients presenting with ASPECTS 0–5, who were treated with mechanical thrombectomy, successful reperfusion was beneficial without increasing the risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage. Although the results do not allow for general treatment recommendations, formal testing of mechanical thrombectomy versus best medical treatment in these patients in a randomized controlled trial is warranted.

BackgroundPerforming mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in patients with basilar artery occlusion (BAO) is currently not evidence-based.ObjectiveTo compare patients’ outcome, relative merits of achieving recanalization, and predictors of futile recanalization (FR) between BAO and anterior circulation large vessel occlusion (ACLVO) MT.MethodsIn the multicenter BEYOND-SWIFT registry (NCT03496064), univariate and multivariate (displayed as adjusted Odds Ratios, aOR and 95% confidence intervals, 95%-CI) outcome comparisons between BAO (N=165) and ACLVO (N=1574) were performed. The primary outcome was favorable outcome at 90 days (modified Rankin Scale, mRS 0-2). Secondary outcome included mortality, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and FR. The relative merits of achieving successful recanalization between ACLVO and BAO were evaluated with interaction terms.ResultsMT in BAO was more often technically effective and equally safe in regards to mortality and sICH when compared to ACLVO. When adjusting for baseline differences, there was no significant difference between BAO vs ACLVO regarding rates of favorable outcome (aOR 0.986, 95%-CI 0.553 – 1.758). However, BAO were associated with increased rates of FR (aOR 2.146, 95%-CI 1.267 – 3.633). Predictors for FR were age, stroke severity, maneuver count and intracranial stenting. No significant heterogeneity on the relative merits of achieving successful recanalization on several outcome parameters were observed when comparing BAO and ACLVO.ConclusionsIn selected patients, similar outcomes can be achieved in BAO and ACLVO patients treated with MT. Randomized controlled trials comparing patient selection and interventional strategies seem warranted to avoid FR.Trial registration numberNCT03496064

Background Optimal management of patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) and low NIHSS score is unknown, which was the aim to investigate in this study. Methods This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective single tertiary care centre 14-year cohort of patients with LVO in the anterior circulation and NIHSS score ≤ 5 on admission. Outcome was analysed according to primary intended therapy. Results Among 185 patients (median age 67.4 years), 52.4% received primary conservative therapy (including 26.8% secondary reperfusion in case of secondary neurological deterioration), 12.4% IV thrombolysis (IVT) only and 35.1% primary endovascular therapy (EVT). 95 (51.4%) patients experienced neurological deterioration until 3 months. Primary-IVT-only and primary-EVT compared to conservative-therapy patients had better 3 months' outcome (54.5% vs. 30.8%: adjusted OR 6.02; adjusted p = 0.004 for mRS 0-1 and 54.7% vs. 30.8%: adjusted OR 5.09; adjusted p = 0.002, respectively). Also mRS shift analysis favored primary-IVT-only and primary-EVT patients ( adjusted OR 6.25; adjusted p = 0.001 and adjusted OR 3.14; adjusted p = 0.003). Outcome in primary-IVT-only vs. primary-EVT patients did not differ significantly. Patients who received secondary EVT because of neurological deterioration after primary-conservative-therapy had worse 3 months' outcome than primary-EVT patients (20.8% vs. 30.8%: adjusted OR 0.24; adjusted p = 0.047 for mRS 0-1 and adjusted OR 0.31; adjusted p = 0.019 in mRS shift analysis). Survival and symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage did not differ amongst groups. Conclusions Our data indicate that primary IVT and/or EVT may be better than primary conservative therapy in patients with LVO in the anterior circulation and low NIHSS score. Furthermore, primary EVT was better than secondary EVT in case of neurological deterioration. There is an unmet need for RCTs to find the optimal therapy for this patient group.