Mechanical thrombectomy versus intrasinus thrombolysis for cerebral venous sinus thrombosis: a non-randomized comparison
- PMID: 24976097
- PMCID: PMC4178772
- DOI: 10.15274/INR-2014-10032
Mechanical thrombectomy versus intrasinus thrombolysis for cerebral venous sinus thrombosis: a non-randomized comparison
Abstract
Small retrospective studies have shown the benefit of endovascular treatment with intrasinus thrombolysis (IST) or mechanical thrombectomy (MT) with/without IST (MT ± IST) in cases of multifocal cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). Our study compares the mortality, functional outcome and periprocedural complications among patients treated with MT ± IST versus IST alone. We reviewed clinical and angiographic findings of 63 patients with CVT who received endovascular treatment at three tertiary care centers. Primary outcome variables were discharge mortality and neurological dysfunction, and intermediate (three months) and long-term (>six months) morbidity. The modified Rankin scale (mRS) was used to assess morbidity. mRS ≤ 1 was considered a good recovery. Neurological dysfunction was rated as neuroscore: 0, normal; 1, mild (ambulatory, communicative); 2, moderate (non-ambulatory, communicative); and 3, severe (non-ambulatory, non-communicative/comatose). In patients who received IST alone, presenting neurological deficits were comparatively minor (p<0.001). When the two groups were adjusted for admission neuroscore, there was no statistical significance between discharge mortality [7(21%) versus 4(14%), p=0.228], neurological dysfunction (p=0.442), intermediate (p=0.336) and long-term morbidity (p=0.988). Patients who received MT ± IST had a higher percentage of periprocedural complications without reaching statistical significance. Compared to IST, MT was performed in severe cases with extensive sinus involvement. When adjusted for admission neurological dysfunction, both groups had similar mortality and discharge neurological dysfunction and similar intermediate and long-term morbidity.
Keywords: cerebral venous thrombosis; stroke; thrombectomy; thrombolysis.
Figures
References
-
- Saposnik G, Barinagarrementeria F, Brown RD, Jr, et al. Diagnosis and management of cerebral venous thrombosis: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2011;42(4):1158–1192. doi: 10.1161/STR.0b013e31820a8364. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Ferro JM, Canhão P, Stam J, et al. Prognosis of cerebral vein and dural sinus thrombosis: results of the International Study on Cerebral Vein and Dural Sinus Thrombosis (ISCVT) Stroke. 2004;35(3):664–670. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000117571.76197.26. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Borhani Haghighi A, Edgell RC, Cruz-Flores S, et al. Mortality of cerebral venous-sinus thrombosis in a large national sample. Stroke. 2012;43(1):262–264. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.635664. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Einhaupl KM, Villringer A, Meister W, et al. Heparin treatment in sinus venous thrombosis. Lancet. 1991;338(8767):597–600. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(91)90607-Q. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Canhão P, Falcao F, Ferro JM. Thrombolytics for cerebral sinus thrombosis: a systematic review. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2003;15(3):159–166. doi: 10.1159/000068833. - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
