BACKGROUND:Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) has transformed acute ischemic stroke (AIS) care, with onset-to-puncture (OTP) time widely recognized as a critical determinant of outcome. However, emerging evidence suggests that in-hospital procedure time (PT)-from arterial puncture to final recanalization-may have an equally or more significant impact. This study examines the relative contribution of PT versus OTP to functional outcomes in patients with AIS undergoing EVT. METHODS:A retrospective analysis was conducted of 6644 patients with AIS treated at 44 international stroke centers from the Stroke Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry (STAR; 2016-2023). Multivariable regression, time-equivalence analysis, and marginal effects modeling were used to assess associations between PT, OTP, and 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) outcomes. Centers were stratified by procedural efficiency and compared using propensity score matching (PSM). Mediation analysis evaluated whether PT accounted for inter-center differences. RESULTS:PT and OTP were independently associated with functional outcomes; however, PT had a significantly stronger effect (adjusted OR for mRS 0-2: PT=0.56 vs OTP=0.96 per hour). Each 5 min increase in PT was equivalent to 78-100 min of additional OTP in outcome impact. Centers with faster average PT had higher rates of functional independence (number needed to treat (NNT)=10), fewer complications, and lower symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage rates. PT significantly mediated the relationship between center tier and outcomes (Sobel's P<0.001). CONCLUSION:While minimizing OTP remains important, PT exerts a greater influence on outcomes after EVT. Procedural efficiency should be emphasized in stroke systems of care and included in center performance metrics to improve patient outcomes.
INTRODUCTION:Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is an effective treatment for basilar artery occlusion (BAO) stroke in select patients. While there is a growing body of literature suggesting that advanced imaging modalities such as computed tomography perfusion (CTP) and magnetic resonance (MR) may not be necessary for selecting anterior circulation large vessel occlusion stroke patients for EVT, whether advanced imaging may be superior to conventional imaging (non-contrast CT and CT angiography) in identifying good treatment candidates among BAO patients is less clear. PATIENTS AND METHODS:This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study of BAO EVT patients treated from 2013 to 2022 in the Stroke Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry. Patients selected for EVT by advanced imaging (CTP or MR) were matched with those selected by conventional imaging using propensity score matching (PSM) accounting for possible confounders. Primary outcome was functional independence at 90 days. Other outcomes include bedridden state or death at 90-days and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). RESULTS:268 patients were included. 150 patients were selected for BAO EVT by conventional imaging, 86 by CTP, and 32 by MR. Patients selected by advanced imaging were significantly older than those selected by conventional imaging (median age 71 vs 64 years, p = 0.001); patient characteristics were otherwise similar between cohorts. After PSM, 90-day outcomes were similar between the two cohorts (p = 0.56), with similar rates of functional independence (39.4% vs 35.1%, p = 0.65), bedridden state or death (40.4% vs 44.7%, p = 0.66), and sICH (3.3% vs 5.7%, p = 0.49) for conventional and advanced imaging groups, respectively. Results were similar across treatment time windows (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Selecting patients for basilar EVT using conventional versus advanced imaging did not result in different clinical outcomes, regardless of treatment time windows. Conventional imaging appears sufficient as a first-line tool for selecting basilar EVT patients in routine clinical practice.
OBJECTIVE:Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for acute large-vessel occlusion stroke is well established, yet its role in patients presenting with minor stroke symptoms (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] score < 6) remains unclear. Prior studies have not accounted for intraprocedural factors that may influence outcomes in this subgroup. METHODS:The authors analyzed 5693 patients from the STAR (Stroke and Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry), including 398 with low NIHSS scores, to evaluate the association between procedure time (PT) and outcomes. Among patients with low NIHSS scores, propensity score matching was used to compare outcomes between those with PT ≤ 35 versus > 35 minutes, a cutoff defined using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. The authors performed a meta-analysis of studies reporting best medical management (BMM) outcomes in patients with low NIHSS scores. To compare these with EVT-treated patients, a matched BMM comparator cohort using stratification on pooled baseline characteristics was constructed. Outcomes included 90-day functional independence (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] scores 0-2), intracranial hemorrhage, and mortality. RESULTS:PT had a stronger negative effect on outcomes in patients with low NIHSS scores compared with those with high scores, with a steeper decline in functional independence per minute of PT (slope: -0.45% vs -0.21%; p = 0.03 for interaction). Among patients with low scores, PT ≤ 35 minutes was associated with higher 90-day functional independence compared with the propensity score-matching cohort with PT > 35 minutes (82.6% vs 59.0%, p < 0.001). When benchmarked against BMM (75.2% mRS scores 0-2), patients undergoing EVT within 35 minutes had superior outcomes (85.1%, p = 0.047). In contrast, EVT with PT > 35 minutes resulted in worse outcomes than BMM (mRS scores 0-2: 59.8%, p = 0.008). The number needed to treat for PT ≤ 35 minutes was 10, whereas PT > 35 minutes yielded a number needed to harm of 6. CONCLUSIONS:PT critically modulates the benefit of EVT in minor stroke. While efficient EVT yields better outcomes than BMM, prolonged procedures are associated with harm. These findings may explain prior inconsistent evidence on EVT in patients with low NIHSS scores and underscore the need to individualize procedural thresholds in this population.
