Abstract
Introduction: Management of anterior circulation emergent large vessel occlusion with tandem carotid occlusion (TCO) remains a challenge during mechanical thrombectomy (MT). To day, there is no consensus regarding emergent carotid stenting (ECS) in the setting of MT with TCO. We aimed to compare the outcomes of ECS versus conservative management (MT alone) among patients with TCO.
Methods: Data from the Stroke Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry between 2010 and 2022 was interrogated. Only patients with concomitant occlusions of cervical carotid and proximal ipsilateral intracranial segments of the ICA or MCA were included in the analyses. We compared baseline, procedural charecteristics, successful reperfusion (mTICI 2b-3), favorable 90-day good outcomes (mRS 0-2), intravenous tPA administration and symptomatic ICH between patients who did or did not undergo ECS. Multivariate regression was performed adjusting for variables of clinical importance. Propensity score matching for IV tPA use was performed to explore its safety with stenting.
Results: Among 9812 thrombectomy patients, 688 patients had TCO; 132 underwent emergent stenting and 444 had MT alone. Patients who did not undergo ECS had a higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation (33.9% Vs 9.2%, P<.001), higher admission NIHSS scores (18 Vs 14, P<.001), shorter time from symptom onset to puncture (275 minutes Vs 333 minutes, P=0.029), and were predominantly women (59.2% Vs 33.6%, P<0.001).Patients with stenting had lower mortality rates ( 17.5% Vs 29.6%, P=0.009), and higher rates of successful reperfusion (83% Vs 95%, P=0.001). No difference in mRS 0-2 (37.5% Vs 30.4%, P=0.178) or sICH were seen (11.1% Vs 15.4%, P=0.219). Propensity score matching analysis (n=129 in each group) demonstrated better rates of reperfusion (94.8 Vs 84.4%, P=0.011) in the stenting group. Advanced age, higher admission NIHSS and lower ASPECT scores were associated with worse clinical outcomes.
Conclusion: ECS during MT for TCO appears to be safe and is associated with better clinical and angiographic outcomes compared to conservative management.