Endovascular Treatment Decision Making in Octogenarians and Nonagenarians
Evidence for efficacy and safety in stroke patients ≥80 years is limited, since they were underrepresented in randomized thrombectomy trials. This study sought to explore how physicians approach endovascular therapy (EVT) decision making in octogenarians and nonagenarians under their current local resources under assumed ideal conditions, i.e. without external (monetary or infrastructural) limitations.
In an international multidisciplinary survey, 607 physicians involved in acute stroke care were randomly assigned 10 out of a pool of 22 case scenarios with different evidence levels for EVT, 4 of which involved octogenarians and 2 nonagenarians, and asked how they would treat the patient in the given scenario A) under their current local resources and B) under assumed ideal conditions, i.e. with no external restraints. Decision rates were calculated and clustered multivariable regression analysis performed to determine adjusted measures of effect size for patient age.
In octogenarians, physicians decided in favor of EVT in 76.7% (all of which were level 2B evidence scenarios) under current local resources and in 80.2% under assumed ideal conditions. In nonagenarians, 74.0% decided in favor of EVT under current local resources (level 1A scenarios: 87.7%, level 2B scenarios: 60.3%) and 79.2% would offer EVT under assumed ideal conditions (level 1A scenarios: 91.3%, level 2B scenarios: 67.2%). Age was not a significant predictor for treatment decision under current local resources (adjusted odds ratio, OR: 0.99, confidence interval, CI: 0.96–1.02 per decile increase) and under assumed ideal conditions (adjusted OR: 1.00, CI 0.97–1.03 per decile increase).
The vast majority of physicians participating in this survey would offer EVT to acute ischemic stroke patients above 80 years.
KeywordsAcute ischemic stroke Elderly patients Mechanical thrombectomy Guidelines
The authors are most grateful to all participants of the survey.
The study was funded by Stryker through an unrestricted research grant to the University of Calgary. The company was not involved in the design, execution, analysis, and interpretation or reporting of the results.
Compliance with ethical guidelines
Conflict of interest
J.M. Ospel is supported by the University of Basel Research Foundation, the Julia Bangerter Rhyner Foundation and the “Freiwillige Akademische Gesellschaft Basel” Foundation. U. Fischer is a consultant for Medtronic, Stryker and CSL Behring and Co-Principal Investigator of SWIFT-DIRECT, a randomized controlled endovascular stroke treatment trial (Medtronic). F. Turjman works as a consultant for Balt and Stryker. G. Saposnik is supported by the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada Career Award. M. Goyal is a consultant for Medtronic, Stryker, Microvention, GE Healthcare, Mentice. N. Kashani N, B. Menon, M. Almekhlafi, A. Wilson, B. Campbell, S. Yoshimura, M. Cherian, J.-H. Heo and M. Hill declare that they have no competing interests.
For this article no studies with human patients or animals were performed by any of the authors. All studies performed were in accordance with the ethical standards indicated in each case.
- 2.Powers WJ, Rabinstein AA, Ackerson T, Adeoye OM, Bambakidis NC, Becker K, et al. 2018 guidelines for the early management of patients with acute Ischemic stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2018;49:e46–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Ospel JM, Kashani N, Goyal M, Menon BK, Campbell BCV, Fischer U, et al. Time of day and endovascular treatment decision in acute stroke with relative endovascular treatment indication: insights from UNMASK EVT international survey. J Neurointerv Surg. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-014976. (Epub ahead of print)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Ospel JM, Kashani N, Wilson AT, Fischer U, Campbell BCV, Sylaja PN, et al. Endovascular treatment decision in acute stroke: does physician gender matter? Insights from UNMASK EVT, an international, multidisciplinary survey. J Neurointerv Surg. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-015003. (Epub ahead of print)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Turc G, Bhogal P, Fischer U, Khatri P, Lobotesis K, Mazighi M, et al. European Stroke Organisation (ESO)—European Society for Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy (ESMINT) guidelines on mechanical thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke. J Neurointerv Surg. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014569. [Epub ahead of print]CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurologie. Akuttherapie des ischämischen Schlaganfalls – Ergänzung 2015. 2015. https://www.dgn.org/leitlinien/3198-030-140-rekanalisierende-therapie-ergaenzung-akuttherapie-schlaganfall. Accessed 15 Oct 2019.Google Scholar
- 19.Societe francaise de neuroradiologie. Charte de la Thrombectomie. 2019. https://www.sfnr.net/neuroradiologie-quotidien/thrombectomie/charte-thrombectomie. Accessed 15 Oct 2019.Google Scholar
- 20.National Health Service. Clinical Commissioning Policy: mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke (all ages). 2019. https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Mechanical-thrombectomy-for-acute-ischaemic-stroke-ERRATA-29-05-19.pdf. Accessed 15 Oct 2019.Google Scholar