Alexander A. Khalessi

2015 American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Focused Update of the 2013 Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Regarding Endovascular Treatment: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

Purpose— The aim of this guideline is to provide a focused update of the current recommendations for the endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke. When there is overlap, the recommendations made here supersede those of previous guidelines. Methods— This focused update analyzes results from 8 randomized, clinical trials of endovascular treatment and other relevant data published since 2013. It is not intended to be a complete literature review from the date of the previous guideline publication but rather to include pivotal new evidence that justifies changes in current recommendations. Members of the writing committee were appointed by the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Stroke Council’s Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Manuscript Oversight Committee. Strict adherence to the American Heart Association conflict of interest policy was maintained throughout the consensus process. Recommendations follow the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association methods of classifying the level of certainty of the treatment effect and the class of evidence. Prerelease review of the draft guideline was performed by 6 expert peer reviewers and by the members of the Stroke Council Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and Stroke Council Leadership Committee. Results— Evidence-based guidelines are presented for the selection of patients with acute ischemic stroke for endovascular treatment, for the endovascular procedure, and for systems of care to facilitate endovascular treatment. Conclusions— Certain endovascular procedures have been demonstrated to provide clinical benefit in selected patients with acute ischemic stroke. Systems of care should be organized to facilitate the delivery of this care.Purpose— The aim of this guideline is to provide a focused update of the current recommendations for the endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Where there is overlap, the recommendations made here supersede those of previous guidelines. Methods— This focused update analyzes results from 8 randomized clinical trials of endovascular treatment and other relevant data published since 2013. It is not intended to be a complete literature review from the date of the previous guideline publication but rather to include pivotal new evidence that justifies changes in current recommendations. Members of the writing committee were appointed by the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Stroke Council’s Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Manuscript Oversight Committee (MOC). Strict adherence to the American Heart Association conflict of interest policy was maintained throughout the consensus process. Recommendations follow the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association methods of classifying the level of certainty of the treatment effect and the class of evidence. Prerelease review of the draft guideline was performed by 6 expert peer reviewers and by the members of the Stroke Council Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and Stroke Council Leadership Committee. Results— Evidence-based guidelines are presented for the selection of patients with acute ischemic stroke for endovascular treatment, the endovascular procedure and for systems of care to facilitate endovascular treatment. Conclusions— Certain endovascular procedures have been demonstrated to provide clinical benefit in selected patients with acute ischemic stroke. Systems of care should be organized to facilitate the delivery of this care.

Scientific Rationale for the Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria for Intravenous Alteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

Purpose— To critically review and evaluate the science behind individual eligibility criteria (indication/inclusion and contraindications/exclusion criteria) for intravenous recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (alteplase) treatment in acute ischemic stroke. This will allow us to better inform stroke providers of quantitative and qualitative risks associated with alteplase administration under selected commonly and uncommonly encountered clinical circumstances and to identify future research priorities concerning these eligibility criteria, which could potentially expand the safe and judicious use of alteplase and improve outcomes after stroke. Methods— Writing group members were nominated by the committee chair on the basis of their previous work in relevant topic areas and were approved by the American Heart Association Stroke Council’s Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the American Heart Association’s Manuscript Oversight Committee. The writers used systematic literature reviews, references to published clinical and epidemiology studies, morbidity and mortality reports, clinical and public health guidelines, authoritative statements, personal files, and expert opinion to summarize existing evidence and to indicate gaps in current knowledge and, when appropriate, formulated recommendations using standard American Heart Association criteria. All members of the writing group had the opportunity to comment on and approved the final version of this document. The document underwent extensive American Heart Association internal peer review, Stroke Council Leadership review, and Scientific Statements Oversight Committee review before consideration and approval by the American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee. Results— After a review of the current literature, it was clearly evident that the levels of evidence supporting individual exclusion criteria for intravenous alteplase vary widely. Several exclusionary criteria have already undergone extensive scientific study such as the clear benefit of alteplase treatment in elderly stroke patients, those with severe stroke, those with diabetes mellitus and hyperglycemia, and those with minor early ischemic changes evident on computed tomography. Some exclusions such as recent intracranial surgery are likely based on common sense and sound judgment and are unlikely to ever be subjected to a randomized, clinical trial to evaluate safety. Most other contraindications or warnings range somewhere in between. However, the differential impact of each exclusion criterion varies not only with the evidence base behind it but also with the frequency of the exclusion within the stroke population, the probability of coexistence of multiple exclusion factors in a single patient, and the variation in practice among treating clinicians.

Endovascular stent therapy for extracranial and intracranial carotid artery dissection: single-center experience

OBJECT The objective of this study was to evaluate endovascular stent therapy for carotid artery dissections (CADs). METHODS Retrospective review of data at Millard Fillmore Gates Hospital identified 43 patients with 44 CADs (intracranial and/or extracranial) treated with carotid artery (CA) stent placement between January 2000 and June 2009. RESULTS Thirty-two CADs were spontaneous and 12 were traumatic; 35 were symptomatic. Lesion locations included the extracranial internal CA (ICA; 24 cases), extracranial ICA with common CA involvement (4 cases), and extracranial ICA-intracranial ICA (16 cases). Carotid artery occlusion was 100% in 15 cases (34.1%), 99% in 6 cases (13.6%), 70%-98% in 13 cases (29.5%), and < 70% in 10 cases (22.7%). Five patients suffered pseudoaneurysms. Stent deployment was successful in 43 (97.7%) of 44 cases. The mean pretreatment score on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale was 6.2 ± 6.2. Recanalization (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Grade 2 or 3) was accomplished for 42 lesions (95.5%). Four patients demonstrated residual parent vessel stenosis (10%-50% in severity). Procedure-related complications occurred in 7 patients and included middle cerebral artery embolism (1 patient), intracranial hemorrhage (2 patients), worsening of dissection (1 patient), stent malpositioning (1 patient), embolic protection filter overload (1 patient), and filter retrieval device fracture (1 patient). Only 2 of these complications caused permanent deficits: the embolism caused a minor but permanent neurological deficit, and 1 intracranial hemorrhage was fatal. At discharge, 36 patients (83.7%) had modified Rankin Scale scores of 0-2 (favorable outcome). During the follow-up interval (mean 19.2 months, range 4-92 months), no patient suffered a new stroke and 1 patient died secondary to preexisting chronic renal failure. In 20 patients with angiographic follow-up, permanent resolution of the dissection was noted in 90.5%; 2 lesions (9.5%) required retreatment. CONCLUSIONS Endovascular stent-assisted repair of extra- and intracranial CAD was safe and effective in this experience and can be recommended for selected patients. In particular, patients with symptomatic CADs that are not responsive to medical therapy should be considered for interventional treatment.

2015 AHA/ASA Focused Update of the 2013 Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Regarding Endovascular Treatment A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

Purpose— The aim of this guideline is to provide a focused update of the current recommendations for the endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke. When there is overlap, the recommendations made here supersede those of previous guidelines. Methods— This focused update analyzes results from 8 randomized, clinical trials of endovascular treatment and other relevant data published since 2013. It is not intended to be a complete literature review from the date of the previous guideline publication but rather to include pivotal new evidence that justifies changes in current recommendations. Members of the writing committee were appointed by the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Stroke Council’s Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Manuscript Oversight Committee. Strict adherence to the American Heart Association conflict of interest policy was maintained throughout the consensus process. Recommendations follow the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association methods of classifying the level of certainty of the treatment effect and the class of evidence. Prerelease review of the draft guideline was performed by 6 expert peer reviewers and by the members of the Stroke Council Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and Stroke Council Leadership Committee. Results— Evidence-based guidelines are presented for the selection of patients with acute ischemic stroke for endovascular treatment, for the endovascular procedure, and for systems of care to facilitate endovascular treatment. Conclusions— Certain endovascular procedures have been demonstrated to provide clinical benefit in selected patients with acute ischemic stroke. Systems of care should be organized to facilitate the delivery of this care.Purpose— The aim of this guideline is to provide a focused update of the current recommendations for the endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Where there is overlap, the recommendations made here supersede those of previous guidelines. Methods— This focused update analyzes results from 8 randomized clinical trials of endovascular treatment and other relevant data published since 2013. It is not intended to be a complete literature review from the date of the previous guideline publication but rather to include pivotal new evidence that justifies changes in current recommendations. Members of the writing committee were appointed by the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Stroke Council’s Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Manuscript Oversight Committee (MOC). Strict adherence to the American Heart Association conflict of interest policy was maintained throughout the consensus process. Recommendations follow the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association methods of classifying the level of certainty of the treatment effect and the class of evidence. Prerelease review of the draft guideline was performed by 6 expert peer reviewers and by the members of the Stroke Council Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and Stroke Council Leadership Committee. Results— Evidence-based guidelines are presented for the selection of patients with acute ischemic stroke for endovascular treatment, the endovascular procedure and for systems of care to facilitate endovascular treatment. Conclusions— Certain endovascular procedures have been demonstrated to provide clinical benefit in selected patients with acute ischemic stroke. Systems of care should be organized to facilitate the delivery of this care.

Midterm clinical and angiographic follow-up for the first Food and Drug Administration-approved prospective, Single-Arm Trial of Primary Stenting for Stroke: SARIS (Stent-Assisted Recanalization for Acute Ischemic Stroke).

BACKGROUND:Although early data demonstrate encouraging angiographic results following intracranial stent deployment for acute ischemic stroke, longer-term follow-up is necessary to evaluate the clinical outcomes, as well as the durability of angiographic results. OBJECTIVE:We report 6-month clinical and radiologic follow-up data of the 20 patients prospectively enrolled in the Stent-Assisted Recanalization in acute Ischemic Stroke (SARIS) trial. METHODS:Twenty patients were prospectively enrolled to receive self-expanding intra-arterial stents as first-line therapy for acute ischemic stroke treatment. Patients were scheduled for follow-up 6-months after treatment for clinical evaluation (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score obtained by a trained certified research nurse/nurse practitioner) and repeat cerebral angiography. Angiographic interpretation was performed by an independent adjudicator. RESULTS:At 6 months, the mRS score was ≤3 in 60% of patients (n = 12) and was ≤2 in 55% of patients (n = 11). Mortality at the 6-month follow-up was 35% (n = 7). Follow-up angiography was performed for 85% (11 of 13) of surviving patients. All patients undergoing angiographic follow-up demonstrated Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 3 flow on digital subtraction angiography or stent patency on computed tomographic angiography. None of the patients demonstrated evidence of in-stent stenosis (≥50% vessel narrowing). CONCLUSION:The midterm angiographic and clinical results following intracranial stent deployment for acute ischemic stroke are encouraging. Further study of primary stent-for-stroke treatment is warranted.

2015 AHA/ASA Focused Update of the 2013 Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Regarding Endovascular Treatment

Purpose— The aim of this guideline is to provide a focused update of the current recommendations for the endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke. When there is overlap, the recommendations made here supersede those of previous guidelines. Methods— This focused update analyzes results from 8 randomized, clinical trials of endovascular treatment and other relevant data published since 2013. It is not intended to be a complete literature review from the date of the previous guideline publication but rather to include pivotal new evidence that justifies changes in current recommendations. Members of the writing committee were appointed by the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Stroke Council’s Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Manuscript Oversight Committee. Strict adherence to the American Heart Association conflict of interest policy was maintained throughout the consensus process. Recommendations follow the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association methods of classifying the level of certainty of the treatment effect and the class of evidence. Prerelease review of the draft guideline was performed by 6 expert peer reviewers and by the members of the Stroke Council Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and Stroke Council Leadership Committee. Results— Evidence-based guidelines are presented for the selection of patients with acute ischemic stroke for endovascular treatment, for the endovascular procedure, and for systems of care to facilitate endovascular treatment. Conclusions— Certain endovascular procedures have been demonstrated to provide clinical benefit in selected patients with acute ischemic stroke. Systems of care should be organized to facilitate the delivery of this care.Purpose— The aim of this guideline is to provide a focused update of the current recommendations for the endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Where there is overlap, the recommendations made here supersede those of previous guidelines. Methods— This focused update analyzes results from 8 randomized clinical trials of endovascular treatment and other relevant data published since 2013. It is not intended to be a complete literature review from the date of the previous guideline publication but rather to include pivotal new evidence that justifies changes in current recommendations. Members of the writing committee were appointed by the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Stroke Council’s Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Manuscript Oversight Committee (MOC). Strict adherence to the American Heart Association conflict of interest policy was maintained throughout the consensus process. Recommendations follow the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association methods of classifying the level of certainty of the treatment effect and the class of evidence. Prerelease review of the draft guideline was performed by 6 expert peer reviewers and by the members of the Stroke Council Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and Stroke Council Leadership Committee. Results— Evidence-based guidelines are presented for the selection of patients with acute ischemic stroke for endovascular treatment, the endovascular procedure and for systems of care to facilitate endovascular treatment. Conclusions— Certain endovascular procedures have been demonstrated to provide clinical benefit in selected patients with acute ischemic stroke. Systems of care should be organized to facilitate the delivery of this care.

Endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke: the end or just the beginning?

Various endovascular intraarterial approaches are available for treating patients with acute ischemic stroke who present with severe neurological deficits. Three recent randomized trials-Interventional Management of Stroke (IMS) III, Mechanical Retrieval and Recanalization of Stroke Clots Using Embolectomy (MR RESCUE), and Synthesis Expansion: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Intra-Arterial Versus Intravenous Thrombolysis in Acute Ischemic Stroke (SYNTHESIS Expansion)-evaluated the efficacy of endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke and, after failing to demonstrate any significant clinical benefit of endovascular therapies, raised concerns and questions in the medical community regarding the future of endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke. In this paper, the authors review the evolution of endovascular treatment strategies for the treatment of acute stroke and provide their interpretation of findings and potential limitations of the three recently published randomized trials. The authors discuss the advantage of stent-retriever technology over earlier endovascular approaches and review the current status and future directions of endovascular acute stroke studies based on lessons learned from previous trials.

Acute stroke intervention.

This review summarizes the current state-of-the-art regarding the endovascular management of acute ischemic stroke. Beginning with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator, this paper traces the gradual shift of systemic thrombolysis from a competing to complementary treatment modality. Intra-arterial thrombolysis, mechanical thrombectomy with the Merci (Concentric Medical, Mountain View, California) and Penumbra (Penumbra, Inc., Alameda, California) systems, angioplasty, primary intracranial stenting, and emerging stentriever devices are sequentially reviewed. Ultimately, this paper lays the foundation for current endovascular stroke management and considers future areas of progress and research.

Initial multicenter technical experience with the Apollo device for minimally invasive intracerebral hematoma evacuation.

BACKGROUND: No conventional surgical intervention has been shown to improve outcomes for patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) compared with medical management. OBJECTIVE: We report the initial multicenter experience with a novel technique for the minimally invasive evacuation of ICH using the Penumbra Apollo system (Penumbra Inc, Alameda, California). METHODS: Institutional databases were queried to perform a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent ICH evacuation with the Apollo system from May 2014 to September 2014 at 4 centers (Medical University of South Carolina, Stony Brook University, University of California at San Diego, and Semmes-Murphy Clinic). Cases were performed either in the neurointerventional suite, operating room, or in a hybrid operating room/angiography suite. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (15 female; mean age, 62 ± 12.6 years) underwent the minimally invasive evacuation of ICH. Six of these parenchymal hemorrhages had an additional intraventricular hemorrhage component. The mean volume of ICH was 45.4 ± 30.8 mL, which decreased to 21.8 ± 23.6 mL after evacuation (mean, 54.1 ± 39.1% reduction; P < .001). Two complications directly attributed to the evacuation attempt were encountered (6.9%). The mortality rate was 13.8% (n = 4). CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive evacuation of ICH and intraventricular hemorrhage can be achieved with the Apollo system. Future work will be required to determine which subset of patients are most likely to benefit from this promising technology. ABBREVIATIONS: GCS, Glasgow Coma Scale ICH, intracerebral hemorrhage IVH, intraventricular hemorrhage tPA, tissue plasminogen activator

Internal carotid artery aneurysms occurring at the origin of fetal variant posterior cerebral arteries: surgical and endovascular experience.

OBJECTIVE A fetal variant posterior cerebral artery (fetal PCA) is an embryological remnant in which the PCA is primarily supplied via the anterior cerebral circulation. Internal carotid artery (ICA) aneurysms originating from the takeoff of fetal PCA vessels deserve special attention before surgical or endovascular obliteration because of a greater potential for ischemic injury. We present the first series of ICA-posterior communicating artery (PComA) aneurysms originating at the takeoff of fetal PCA vessels that were treated by surgical or endovascular intervention. METHODS A retrospective chart review was conducted for all patients who underwent surgical and endovascular treatment of an ICA-PComA aneurysm at Los Angeles County-University of Southern California Medical Center during a 15-year period (1991–2006) to identify cases with aneurysms originating from fetal variant PCAs. Data were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed. RESULTS During a 15-year period, 271 patients were treated for 273 ICA-PComA aneurysms. Aneurysms occurring at the origin of fetal PCAs were identified in 30 patients (11%). There were 23 women (77%) and seven men (23%) (sex difference, P = 0.0035). Twenty-four patients underwent surgical clipping, whereas six patients underwent endovascular coiling. The mean aneurysm size was 7 mm. The mean ischemia time with temporary clipping (12 cases) was 4.5 minutes. Intraoperative rupture occurred in four surgical cases (17%). Postoperative angiography demonstrated occlusion of the fetal PCA in one case after clip ligation (3%), with an ensuing occipital infarct yet no clinical symptoms. CONCLUSION ICA-PComA aneurysms originating from fetal PCA vessels may pose a more substantial risk for infarction and subsequent neurological sequelae with surgical or endovascular obliteration. Fetal variant circulations were identified at the PComA origin in 11% of ICA-PComA aneurysm patients and were more commonly encountered in women. The decision of surgical versus endovascular treatment of fetal PCA aneurysms must be carefully considered, given the greater potential for ischemic injury with parent vessel occlusion.OBJECTIVE: A fetal variant posterior cerebral artery (fetal PCA) is an embryological remnant in which the PCA is primarily supplied via the anterior cerebral circulation. Internal carotid artery (ICA) aneurysms originating from the takeoff of fetal PCA vessels deserve special attention before surgical or endovascular obliteration because of a greater potential for ischemic injury. We present the first series of ICA-posterior communicating artery (PComA) aneurysms originating at the takeoff of fetal PCA vessels that were treated by surgical or endovascular intervention. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted for all patients who underwent surgical and endovascular treatment of an ICA-PComA aneurysm at Los Angeles County-University of Southern California Medical Center during a 15-year period (1991-2006) to identify cases with aneurysms originating from fetal variant PCAs. Data were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed. RESULTS: During a 15-year period, 271 patients were treated for 273 ICA-PComA aneurysms. Aneurysms occurring at the origin of fetal PCAs were identified in 30 patients (11 %). There were 23 women (77%) and seven men (23%) (sex difference, P = 0.0035). Twenty-four patients underwent surgical clipping, whereas six patients underwent endovascular coiling. The mean aneurysm size was 7 mm. The mean ischemia time with temporary clipping (12 cases) was 4.5 minutes. Intraoperative rupture occurred in four surgical cases (17%). Postoperative angiography demonstrated occlusion of the fetal PCA in one case after clip ligation (3%), with an ensuing occipital infarct yet no clinical symptoms. CONCLUSION: ICA-PCOmA aneurysms originating from fetal PCA vessels may pose a more substantial risk for infarction and subsequent neurological sequelae with surgical or endovascular obliteration. Fetal variant circulations were identified at the PComA origin in 11% of ICA-PComA aneurysm patients and were more commonly encountered in women. The decision of surgical versus endovascular treatment of fetal PCA aneurysms must be carefully considered, given the greater potential for ischemic injury with parent vessel occlusion.