Show simple item record

 
dc.contributorVall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus
dc.contributor.authorAnastasiou, Aikaterini
dc.contributor.authorKaesmacher, Johannes
dc.contributor.authorCarmona Fuentes, Tomás
dc.contributor.authorBrehm, Alex
dc.contributor.authorMujanovic, Adnan
dc.contributor.authorde Dios Lascuevas, Marta
dc.date.accessioned2025-11-04T12:44:16Z
dc.date.available2025-11-04T12:44:16Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.identifier.citationAnastasiou A, Brehm A, Kaesmacher J, Mujanovic A, de Dios Lascuevas M, Carmona Fuentes T, et al. Platelet inhibition strategies in rescue stenting after failed thrombectomy: a large retrospective multicenter registry. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2025;18:17562864251360912.
dc.identifier.issn1756-2864
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11351/14014
dc.descriptionIntracranial arteriosclerosis; Ischemic stroke; Platelet aggregation inhibitors
dc.description.abstractBackground: Rescue stenting (RS) is a bailout strategy for failed thrombectomy. Optimal platelet inhibition strategy after RS remains unclear. Objectives: We aimed to describe and compare different platelet inhibition strategies during/after RS. Design: Retrospective cohort study across 34 international centers. Methods: Patients with large vessel occlusion and RS after failed thrombectomy (2019–2023) were included. Periprocedural and postprocedural platelet inhibition strategies were described and compared, focusing on glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (GPIIb/IIIa) inhibitors, single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT), and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). We assessed the effects of platelet inhibition strategy and potentially covariates on the primary outcome of 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) using ordinal shift analysis with proportional odds models. Results: RS was performed in 589 patients (mean age 67.9 years, 60.8% male). Numerous combinations of platelet inhibitors were administered. Periprocedural GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors were used in 61.5% of patients. Postprocedural DAPT was administered to 80.5% and SAPT to 13.3%. Functional independence (mRS 0–2) was achieved in 40.7%, while 26.3% died within 90 days. Stent occlusion occurred in 20.5%, with 67.6% of these occlusions within 24 h. Postprocedural stent-occlusion was independently associated with worse functional outcome at 90 days (OR 4.1, 95% CI 2.3–7.2, p < 0.001). No significant association between periprocedural GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors, and 90-day mRS or stent occlusion was found. Postprocedural SAPT was associated with worse functional outcomes (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.4, 95% CI 1.1–5.0, p = 0.02), higher mortality (aOR 2.1, 95% CI 1.05–4.0, p = 0.03), and increased stent occlusion rates (aOR 4.8, 95% CI 2.3–9.7, p < 0.001) compared to postprocedural DAPT. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 6.8% of patients, with no significant difference between antiplatelet regimens. Conclusion: Extensive heterogeneity exists in platelet inhibition strategies following RS. Stent occlusion is associated with worse clinical outcomes, and the first 24 h post-RS are critical for stent patency. Compared to SAPT, DAPT was associated with better functional outcome, lower mortality, and lower stent occlusion rates.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherSAGE Publications
dc.relation.ispartofseriesTherapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders;18
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.sourceScientia
dc.subjectMalalties cerebrovasculars - Cirurgia
dc.subjectVasos sanguinis - Cirurgia
dc.subjectPròtesis de Stent
dc.subjectPlaquetes sanguínies - Agregació - Inhibidors
dc.subject.meshPlatelet Aggregation Inhibitors
dc.subject.meshStents
dc.subject.meshThrombectomy
dc.subject.meshStroke
dc.subject.mesh/surgery
dc.titlePlatelet inhibition strategies in rescue stenting after failed thrombectomy: a large retrospective multicenter registry
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/17562864251360913
dc.subject.decsinhibidores de la agregación plaquetaria
dc.subject.decsstents
dc.subject.decstrombectomía
dc.subject.decsaccidente cerebrovascular
dc.subject.decs/cirugía
dc.relation.publishversionhttps://doi.org/10.1177/17562864251360913
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.audienceProfessionals
dc.contributor.organismesInstitut Català de la Salut
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Anastasiou A, Brehm A] Diagnostic & Interventional Neuroradiology Department, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. [Kaesmacher J] Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Inselspital University Hospital Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, CIC-IT 1415, CHRU de Tours, Tours, France. [Mujanovic A] Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Inselspital University Hospital Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. [de Dios Lascuevas M, Carmona Fuentes T] Secció de Neuroradiologia Intervencionista, Servei de Radiodiagnòstic, Vall d’Hebron Hospital Universitari, Barcelona, Spain
dc.identifier.pmid40860647
dc.identifier.wos001561889800001
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record