This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 39/2/379    most recent STROKEAHA.107.492348v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mattle, H. P. Articles by Baumgartner, R. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mattle, H. P. Articles by Baumgartner, R. W. Pubmed/NCBI databases Substance via MeSH Related Collections Acute Cerebral Infarction Thrombolysis

(Stroke. 2008;39:379.)
© 2008 American Heart Association, Inc.

Original Contributions

Comparison of Intraarterial and Intravenous Thrombolysis for Ischemic Stroke With Hyperdense Middle Cerebral Artery Sign

Heinrich P. Mattle, MD; Marcel Arnold, MD; Dimitrios Georgiadis, MD; Christian Baumann, MD; Krassen Nedeltchev, MD; David Benninger, MD; Luca Remonda, MD; Christian von Büdingen, MD; Anca Diana, MS; Athina Pangalu, MD; Gerhard Schroth, MD Ralf W. Baumgartner, MD

From the Departments of Neurology (H.P.M., M.A., K.N., A.D.) and Neuroradiology (L.R., G.S.), University Hospitals of Bern, and the Departments of Neurology (D.G., C.B., D.B., C.v.B., R.W.B.) and Neuroradiology (A.P.), University Hospital of Zürich, Switzerland.

Correspondence to Heinrich Mattle, MD, University Hospital Bern, Department of Neurology, Inselspital, Freiburgstrasse, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland. E-mail heinrich.mattle{at}insel.ch

Background and Purpose— It is unclear whether intraarterial (IAT) or intravenous (IVT) thrombolysis is more effective for ischemic stroke with hyperdense middle cerebral artery sign (HMCAS) on computed tomography (CT). The aim of this study was to compare IAT and IVT in stroke patients with HMCAS.

Methods— Comparison of data from 2 stroke units with similar management of stroke associated with HMCAS, except that 1 unit performed IAT with urokinase and the other IVT with plasminogen activator. Time to treatment was up to 6 hours for IAT and up to 3 hours for IVT. Outcome was measured by mortality and the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), dichotomized at 3 months into favorable (mRS 0 to 2) and unfavorable (mRS 3 to 6).

Results— One hundred twelve patients exhibited a HMCAS, 55 of 268 patients treated with IAT and 57 of 249 patients who underwent IVT. Stroke severity at baseline and patient age were similar in both groups. Mean time to treatment was longer in the IAT group (244±63 minutes) than in the IVT group (156±21 minutes; P=0.0001). However, favorable outcome was more frequent after IAT (n=29, 53%) than after IVT (n=13, 23%; P=0.001), and mortality was lower after IAT (n=4, 7%) than after IVT (n=13, 23%; P=0.022). After multiple regression analysis IAT was associated with a more favorable outcome than IVT (P=0.003) but similar mortality (P=0.192).

Conclusion— In this observational study intraarterial thrombolysis was more beneficial than IVT in the specific group of stroke patients presenting with HMCAS on CT, even though IAT was started later. Our results indicate that a randomized trial comparing both thrombolytic treatments in patients with middle cerebral artery occlusion is warranted.

Key Words: acute stroke • therapy • thrombolysis