Direct to Angiosuite Versus Conventional Imaging in Suspected Large Vessel Occlusion: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis. Issue 8 (20th May 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Mohammaden, Mahmoud H.; Doheim, Mohamed Fahmy; Elfil, Mohamed; Al-Bayati, Alhamza R.; Pinheiro, Agostinho; Nguyen, Thanh N.; Bhatt, Nirav R.; Haussen, Diogo C.; Nogueira, Raul G.
• Is Part Of: Stroke. Volume 53:Issue 8(2022)
• Page Start: 2478
• Page End: 2487
• Publication Date: 2022-05-20
• Subjects: angiography -- cerebral infarction -- hemorrhage -- reperfusion -- thrombectomy; Cerebrovascular disease -- Periodicals; Cerebral circulation -- Periodicals; 616.81
• DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.038221
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0039-2499

Abstract

Abstract : Background: There is growing evidence to suggest that the direct transfer to angiography suite (DTAS) approach for patients with suspected large vessel occlusion stroke potentially requiring mechanical thrombectomy shortens treatment times and improves outcomes compared with the direct transfer to conventional imaging (DTCI) model. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to compare both approaches to build more concrete evidence to support this innovative treatment concept. Methods: All potentially relevant studies published in 4 electronic databases/search engines (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus) from inception to November 2021 were reviewed. Eligible studies were included if they enrolled ≥10 patients in both groups, were published in English, and reported baseline and procedural characteristics and outcomes. Relevant data were then extracted and analyzed. Results: Among 4514 searched studies, 7 qualified for the analysis with 1971 patients (DTAS=675, DTCI=1296). Times from door to puncture (mean difference, −30.76 minutes [95% CI, −43.70 to −17.82]; P <0.001) as well as door-to-reperfusion (mean difference=−33.24 minutes [95% CI, −51.82 to −14.66]; P <0.001) were significantly shorter and the rates of functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score, 0–2: risk ratio [RR], 1.25 [95% CI, 1.02–1.53]; P =0.03) at 90 days were higher in the DTAS versus the DTCI approach. There was no difference across the DTAS and DTCI groups in terms of the rates of successful reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score 2B–3: RR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.95–1.12]; P =0.42), near-complete/full reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction 2C–3: RR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.74–1.08]; P =0.23), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (RR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.56–1.17]; P =0.26), or fair outcomes (modified Rankin Scale score, 0–3: RR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.88–1.47]; P =0.32) or mortality (RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.67–1.44]; P =0.93) at 90 days. Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference in 90-day functional independence across approaches in transfer patients (RR, 1.20 [95% CI, 0.96–1.51]; P =0.11). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis showed that the DTAS approach seems to be associated with improved time metrics and functional outcomes with comparable safety to the DTCI approach. Ongoing multicenter randomized clinical trials will hopefully provide more definite data about this promising approach.