Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 25, 2025
Modeling Stroke in Mice: Transient Middle Cerebral Artery Occlusion via the External Carotid Artery
Published on: May 24, 2021
Comparing Outcomes of Thrombectomy Versus Intravenous Thrombolysis Based on Middle Cerebral Artery M2 Occlusion
Huan Zhou1, Wansi Zhong1, Tingxia Zhang1
1Department of Neurology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University, School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China (H.Z., W.Z., T.Z., J.Y., M.L., S.Y.).
Background:
Current evidence provides limited support for the superiority of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in patients with M2 segment middle cerebral artery occlusion. We aim to investigate whether imaging features of M2 segment occlusion impact the effectiveness of EVT.
Methods:
We conducted a retrospective cohort study from January 2017 to January 2022, drawing data from the CASE II registry (Computer-Based Online Database of Acute Stroke Patients for Stroke Management Quality Evaluation), which specifically documented patients with acute ischemic stroke presenting with M2 segment occlusion undergoing reperfusion therapy. Patients were stratified into the intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) group (IVT alone) and EVT group (IVT plus EVT or EVT alone). The primary outcome was a modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 2 at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included additional thresholds and distribution of modified Rankin Scale scores, 24-hour recanalization, early neurological deterioration, and relevant complications during hospitalization. Safety outcomes encompassed intracranial hemorrhagic events at 24 hours and mortality at 90 days. Binary logistic regression analyses with propensity score matching were used. Subgroup analyses were performed based on the anatomic site of occlusion, including right versus left, proximal versus distal, dominant/co-dominant versus nondominant, single versus double/triple branch(es), and anterior versus central/posterior branch.
Results:
Among 734 patients (43.3% were females; median age, 73 years) with M2 segment occlusion, 342 (46.6%) were in the EVT group. Propensity score matching analysis revealed no statistical difference in the primary outcome (odds ratio, 0.860 [95% CI, 0.611-1.209]; P=0.385) between the EVT group and IVT group. However, EVT was associated with a higher incidence of subarachnoid hemorrhage (odds ratio, 6.655 [95% CI, 1.487-29.788]; P=0.004) and pneumonia (odds ratio, 2.015 [95% CI, 1.364-2.977]; P<0.001). Subgroup analyses indicated that patients in the IVT group achieved better outcomes when presenting with right, distal, or nondominant branch occlusion (Pall interaction<0.05).
Conclusions:
Our study showed similar efficiency of EVT versus IVT alone in acute M2 segment middle cerebral artery occlusion. This suggested that only specific patient subpopulations might have a potentially higher benefit of EVT over IVT alone.
Registration:
URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04487340.
