Skip to main content
Clinical and Neuroimaging Outcomes of Direct Thrombectomy vs Bridging Therapy in Large Vessel Occlusion: Analysis of the SELECT Cohort Study. Neurology Sarraj, A., Grotta, J., Albers, G. W., Hassan, A. E., Blackburn, S., Day, A., Sitton, C., Abraham, M., Cai, C., Dannenbaum, M., Pujara, D., Hicks, W., Budzik, R., Vora, N., Arora, A., Alenzi, B., Tekle, W. G., Kamal, H., Mir, O., Barreto, A. D., Lansberg, M., Gupta, R., Martin-Schild, S., Savitz, S., Tsivgoulis, G., SELECT investigators 2021


OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative safety and efficacy of direct endovascular thrombectomy(dEVT) compared to bridging therapy(BT:IV-tPA+EVT) and assess if BT potential benefit relates to stroke severity, size and initial presentation to EVT vs. non-EVT center.METHODS: In a prospective multicenter cohort-study of imaging selection for endovascular thrombectomy[SELECT], anterior-circulation large vessel occlusion (LVO) patients presenting to EVT-capable centers within 4.5hours from last-known-well were stratified into BT vs. dEVT. The primary outcome was 90-day functional independence[modified Rankin Scale(mRS)=0-2]. Secondary outcomes included a shift across 90-day mRS grades, mortality, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. We also performed subgroup-analyses according to initial presentation to EVT-capable center (direct versus transfer), stroke severity and baseline infarct core volume.RESULTS: We identified 226 LVOs (54%:men, mean age:65.6±14.6years, median NIHSS-score: 17, 28% received dEVT). Median time from arrival to groin-puncture did not differ in BT-patients when presenting directly[dEVT:1.43 (IQR=1.13-1.90) hours vs. BT:1.58(IQR=1.27-2.02)hours,p=0.40] or transferred to EVT-capable centers[dEVT:1.17 (IQR: 0.90-1.48) hours vs. BT:1.27 (IQR: 0.97-1.87) hours,p=0.24]. BT was associated with higher odds of 90-day functional independence (57% vs. 44%,aOR=2.02,95%CI:1.01-4.03,p=0.046) and functional improvement (adjusted cOR=2.06,95%CI:1.18-3.60,p=0.011), and lower likelihood of 90-day mortality (11% vs. 23%,aOR: 0.20,95%CI:0.07-0.58,p=0.003). No differences in any other outcomes were detected. In subgroup-analyses, BT patients with baseline NIHSS-scores<15 had higher functional independence likelihood compared to dEVT (aOR=4.87,95%CI:1.56-15.18,p=0.006); this association was not evident for patients with NIHSS-scores=15 (aOR=1.05,95%CI:0.40-2.74,p=0.92). Similarly, functional outcomes improvements with BT were detected in patients with core volume strata (Ischemic core <50cc: aOR: 2.10, 95% CI:1.02-4.33, p=0.044 vs ischemic core =50cc: aOR: 0.41,95% CI:0.01-16.02,p=0.64) and transfer status (transferred: aOR: 2.21,95% CI:0.93-9.65,p=0.29 vs direct to EVT center: aOR:1.84,95%CI:0.80-4.23,p=0.15).CONCLUSIONS: Bridging therapy appears to be associated with better clinical outcomes, especially with milder NIHSS-scores, smaller presentation core volumes and those who were "dripped and shipped". We did not observe any potential benefit of bridging therapy in patients with more severe strokes.CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that for patients with ischemic stroke from anterior-circulation LVO within 4.5 hours from last-known-well, bridging therapy compared to direct endovascular thrombectomy leads to better 90-day functional outcomes.

View details for DOI 10.1212/WNL.0000000000012063

View details for PubMedID 33875560