Thrombus volume in posterior circulation stroke (PCS) has been associated with outcome, through recanalization. Manual thrombus segmentation is impractical for large scale analysis of image... Show moreThrombus volume in posterior circulation stroke (PCS) has been associated with outcome, through recanalization. Manual thrombus segmentation is impractical for large scale analysis of image characteristics. Hence, in this study we develop the first automatic method for thrombus localization and segmentation on CT in patients with PCS. In this multi-center retrospective study, 187 patients with PCS from the MR CLEAN Registry were included. We developed a convolutional neural network (CNN) that segments thrombi and restricts the volume-of-interest (VOI) to the brainstem (Polar-UNet). Furthermore, we reduced false positive localization by removing small-volume objects, referred to as volume-based removal (VBR). Polar-UNet is benchmarked against a CNN that does not restrict the VOI (BL-UNet). Performance metrics included the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) between automated and manually segmented thrombus volumes, the thrombus localization precision and recall, and the Dice coefficient. The majority of the thrombi were localized. Without VBR, Polar-UNet achieved a thrombus localization recall of 0.82, versus 0.78 achieved by BL-UNet. This high recall was accompanied by a low precision of 0.14 and 0.09. VBR improved precision to 0.65 and 0.56 for Polar-UNet and BL-UNet, respectively, with a small reduction in recall to 0.75 and 0.69. The Dice coefficient achieved by Polar-UNet was 0.44, versus 0.38 achieved by BL-UNet with VBR. Both methods achieved ICCs of 0.41 (95% CI: 0.27-0.54). Restricting the VOI to the brainstem improved the thrombus localization precision, recall, and segmentation overlap compared to the benchmark. VBR improved thrombus localization precision but lowered recall. Show less
Background and Purpose: The benefit of endovascular treatment (EVT) for posterior circulation stroke (PCS) remains uncertain, and little is known on treatment outcomes in clinical practice. This... Show moreBackground and Purpose: The benefit of endovascular treatment (EVT) for posterior circulation stroke (PCS) remains uncertain, and little is known on treatment outcomes in clinical practice. This study evaluates outcomes of a large PCS cohort treated with EVT in clinical practice. Simultaneous to this observational study, several intervention centers participated in the BASICS trial (Basilar Artery International Cooperation Study), which tested the efficacy of EVT for basilar artery occlusion in a randomized setting. We additionally compared characteristics and outcomes of patients treated outside BASICS in trial centers to those from nontrial centers. Methods: We included patients with PCS from the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands Registry: a prospective, multicenter, observational study of patients who underwent EVT in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2018. Primary outcome was a score of 0 to 3 on the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included reperfusion status and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. For outcome comparison between patients treated in trial versus nontrial centers, we used ordinal logistic regression analysis. Results: We included 264 patients of whom 135 (51%) had received intravenous thrombolysis. The basilar artery was most often involved (77%). Favorable outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0-3) was observed in 115/252 (46%) patients, and 109/252 (43%) patients died. Successful reperfusion was achieved in 178/238 (75%), and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 9/264 (3%). The 154 nontrial patients receiving EVT in BASICS trial centers had similar characteristics and outcomes as the 110 patients treated in nontrial centers (modified Rankin Scale adjusted cOR: 0.77 [95% CI, 0.5-1.2]). Conclusions: Our study shows that high rates of favorable clinical outcome and successful reperfusion can be achieved with EVT for PCS, despite high mortality. Characteristics and outcomes of patients treated in trial versus nontrial centers were similar indicating that our cohort is representative of clinical practice in the Netherlands. Randomized studies using modern treatment approaches are needed for further insight in the benefit of EVT for PCS. Show less
Background Higher expanded Treatment In Cerebral Ischemia (eTICI) reperfusion scores after endovascular treatment (EVT) are associated with better outcomes. However, the influence of the number of... Show moreBackground Higher expanded Treatment In Cerebral Ischemia (eTICI) reperfusion scores after endovascular treatment (EVT) are associated with better outcomes. However, the influence of the number of passes on this association is unclear. We aimed to compare outcomes of single-pass good reperfusion (eTICI 2B) with multiple-pass excellent/complete reperfusion (eTICI 2C/3) in daily clinical practice. Methods We compared outcomes of patients in the MR CLEAN Registry with good reperfusion (eTICI 2B) in a single pass to those with excellent/complete reperfusion (eTICI 2C/3) in multiple passes. Regression models were used to investigate the association of single-pass eTICI 2B versus multiple-pass eTICI 2C/3 reperfusion with 90-day functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale (mRS)), functional independence (mRS 0-2), per-procedural complications and safety outcomes. Results We included 699 patients: 178 patients with single-pass eTICI 2B, and 242 and 279 patients with eTICI 2C/3 after 2 and >= 3 passes, respectively. Patients with eTICI 2C/3 after 2 or >= 3 passes did not achieve significantly better functional outcomes compared with patients with single-pass eTICI 2B (adjusted common OR (acOR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.50 and acOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05 for 90-day mRS, and adjusted OR (aOR) 1.24, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.97 and aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.22 for functional independence). Conclusions Our results did not show better outcomes for patients who achieved eTICI 2C/3 in multiple, that is, two or more, passes when compared with patients with single-pass eTICI 2B. However, this concerns observational data. Further research is necessary to investigate the per-pass effect in relation to reperfusion and functional outcome. Show less
Amini, M.; Hartog, S.J. den; Leeuwen, N. van; Eijkenaar, F.; Kuhrij, L.S.; Stolze, L.J.; ... ; PERFEQTOS Investigators 2021
Background: Although the provision of performance feedback to healthcare professionals based on data from quality registries is common practice in many fields of medicine, observational studies of... Show moreBackground: Although the provision of performance feedback to healthcare professionals based on data from quality registries is common practice in many fields of medicine, observational studies of its effect on the quality of care have shown mixed results. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of performance feedback on the quality of care for acute ischemic stroke.Methods: PERFEQTOS is a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial in 13 hospitals in the Netherlands providing endovascular thrombectomy for ischemic stroke. The primary outcome is the hospital's door-to-groin time. The study starts with a 6-month period in which none of the hospitals receives the performance feedback intervention. Subsequently, every 6 months, three or four hospitals are randomized to cross over from the control to the intervention conditions, until all hospitals receive the feedback intervention. The feedback intervention consists of a dashboard with quarterly reports on patient characteristics, structure, process, and outcome indicators related to patients with ischemic stroke treated with endovascular thrombectomy. Hospitals can compare their present performance with their own performance in the past and with other hospitals. The performance feedback is provided to local quality improvement teams in each hospital, who define their own targets on specific indicators and develop performance improvement plans. The impact of the performance feedback and improvement plans will be evaluated by comparing the primary outcome before and after the intervention.Discussion: This study will provide evidence on the effectiveness of performance feedback to healthcare providers. The results will be actively disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations, and various stakeholder engagement activities. Show less
Background and purpose We investigated whether the annual volume of patients with acute ischemic stroke referred from a primary stroke center (PSC) for endovascular treatment (EVT) is associated... Show moreBackground and purpose We investigated whether the annual volume of patients with acute ischemic stroke referred from a primary stroke center (PSC) for endovascular treatment (EVT) is associated with treatment times and functional outcome. Methods We used data from the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN) registry (2014-2017). We included patients with acute ischemic stroke of the anterior circulation who were transferred from a PSC to a comprehensive stroke center (CSC) for EVT. We examined the association between EVT referral volume of PSCs and treatment times and functional outcome using multivariable regression modeling. The main outcomes were time from arrival at the PSC to groin puncture (PSC-door-to-groin time), adjusted for estimated ambulance travel times, time from arrival at the CSC to groin puncture (CSC-door-to-groin time), and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days after stroke. Results Of the 3637 patients in the registry, 1541 patients (42%) from 65 PSCs were included. Mean age was 71 years (SD +/- 13.3), median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 16 (interquartile range [IQR]: 12-19), and median time from stroke onset to arrival at the PSC was 53 min (IQR: 38-90). Eighty-three percent had received intravenous thrombolysis. EVT referral volume was not associated with PSC-door-to-groin time (adjusted coefficient: -0.49 min/annual referral, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.27 to 0.29), CSC-door-to-groin time (adjusted coefficient: -0.34 min/annual referral, 95% CI: -0.69 to 0.01) or 90-day mRS score (adjusted common odds ratio: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.96-1.01). Conclusions In patients transferred from a PSC for EVT, higher PSC volumes do not seem to translate into better workflow metrics or patient outcome. Show less
Background First pass reperfusion (FPR), that is, excellent reperfusion (expanded treatment in cerebral ischemia (eTICI) 2C-3) in one pass, after endovascular treatment (EVT) of an occluded artery... Show moreBackground First pass reperfusion (FPR), that is, excellent reperfusion (expanded treatment in cerebral ischemia (eTICI) 2C-3) in one pass, after endovascular treatment (EVT) of an occluded artery in the anterior circulation, is associated with favorable clinical outcome, even when compared with multiple pass excellent reperfusion (MPR). In patients with posterior circulation ischemic stroke (PCS), the same association is expected, but currently unknown. We aimed to assess characteristics associated with FPR and the influence of FPR versus MPR on outcomes in patients with PCS. Methods We used data from the MR CLEAN Registry, a prospective observational study. The effect of FPR on 24-hour National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, as percentage reduction, and on modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores at 3 months, was tested with linear and ordinal logistic regression models. Results Of 224 patients with PCS, 45 patients had FPR, 47 had MPR, and 90 had no excellent reperfusion (eTICI <2C). We did not find an association between any of the patient, imaging, or treatment characteristics and FPR. FPR was associated with better NIHSS (-45% (95% CI: -65% to -12%)) and better mRS scores (adjusted common odds ratio (acOR): 2.16 (95% CI: 1.23 to 3.79)) compared with no FPR. Outcomes after FPR were also more favorable compared with MPR, but the effect was smaller and not statistically significant (NIHSS: -14% (95% CI: -51% to 49%), mRS acOR: 1.50 (95% CI: 0.75 to 3.00)). Conclusions FPR in patients with PCS is associated with favorable clinical outcome in comparison with no FPR. In comparison with MPR, the effect of FPR was no longer statistically significant. Nevertheless, our data support the notion that FPR should be the treatment target to pursue in every patient treated with EVT. Show less
Background First-pass reperfusion (FPR) is associated with favorable outcome after endovascular treatment. It is unknown whether this effect is independent of patient characteristics and whether... Show moreBackground First-pass reperfusion (FPR) is associated with favorable outcome after endovascular treatment. It is unknown whether this effect is independent of patient characteristics and whether FPR has better outcomes compared with excellent reperfusion (Expanded Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction [eTICI] 2C-3) after multiple-passes reperfusion. We aimed to evaluate the association between FPR and outcome with adjustment for patient, imaging, and treatment characteristics to single out the contribution of FPR.Methods and ResultsFPR was defined as eTICI 2C-3 after 1 pass. Multivariable regression models were used to investigate characteristics associated with FPR and to investigate the effect of FPR on outcomes. We included 2686 patients of the MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) Registry. Factors associated with FPR were as follows: history of hyperlipidemia (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.10), middle cerebral artery versus intracranial carotid artery occlusion (adjusted OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06-1.16), and aspiration versus stent thrombectomy (adjusted OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.11). Interventionist experience increased the likelihood of FPR (adjusted OR, 1.03 per 50 patients previously treated; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06). Adjusted for patient, imaging, and treatment characteristics, FPR remained associated with a better 24-hour National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score (-37%; 95% CI, -43% to -31%) and a better modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 3 months (adjusted common OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.83-2.54) compared with no FPR (multiple-passes reperfusion+no excellent reperfusion), and compared with multiple-passes reperfusion alone (24-hour NIHSS score, (-23%; 95% CI, -31% to -14%), and mRS score (adjusted common OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.19-1.78)).ConclusionsFPR compared with multiple-passes reperfusion is associated with favorable outcome, independently of patient, imaging, and treatment characteristics. Factors associated with FPR were the experience of the interventionist, history of hyperlipidemia, location of occluded artery, and use of an aspiration device compared with stent thrombectomy. Show less
