Neuroradiology

, Volume 57, Issue 3, pp 227–240 | Cite as

Scoring flow restoration in cerebral angiograms after endovascular revascularization in acute ischemic stroke patients

  • Johannes C. Gerber
  • Yves J. Miaux
  • Rüdiger von Kummer
Continuing Education

Abstract

Endovascular revascularization techniques are increasingly used to treat arterial occlusions in patients with acute ischemic stroke. To monitor and communicate treatment results, a valid, reproducible, and clinically relevant, yet easy to use grading scheme of arterial recanalization and tissue reperfusion for digital subtraction angiography is needed. An ideal scoring system would consider the target arterial lesion, the perfusion deficit, and the collateral status before treatment and measure recanalization, reperfusion, early venous shunting, vasospasm, as well as distal embolization after flow restoration. Currently, a variety of different flow restoration scales are in use, including the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction scoring system, the Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score, and the Arterial Occlusive Lesion score, which describe the local recanalization result. These scores are not used homogeneously throughout the literature, are often modified and not fully documented, which make them inept to compare treatment effects across studies. In addition, none of these scores cover all of the above-mentioned aspects, nor are they able to describe satisfactorily all relevant angiographic findings, and data on their reliability and predictive power regarding clinical outcome are sparse. We aimed to review and illustrate the different revascularization scales, discuss their advantages and limitations as well as the available data regarding standardization, reliability testing, and outcome prediction. In addition, we give examples for the use of the scales and show potential pitfalls.

Keywords

Acute ischemic stroke Endovascular therapy Recanalization Reperfusion Grading scales 

Notes

Ethical standards and patient consent

We declare that all human studies have been approved by our institutional Ethics Committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. Due to the retrospective nature of this anonymized patient image and data study, patient consent was waived.

Conflict of interest

JG received personal fees and non-financial support from Penumbra Inc., non-financial support from Covidien and MicroVention Deutschland GmbH and personal fees from DePuy Codman and J&J Medical GmbH, all unrelated to the submitted work. YIM received personal fees from Synarc during the study. RVK received personal fees from Synarc, Lundbeck, Penumbra and Covidien, all unrelated to the submitted work.

References

  1. 1.
    Rha J-H, Saver JL (2007) The impact of recanalization on ischemic stroke outcome: a meta-analysis. Stroke 38:967–973. doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000258112.14918.24 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Khatri P, Neff J, Broderick JP et al (2005) Revascularization end points in stroke interventional trials: recanalization versus reperfusion in IMS-I. Stroke 36:2400–2403. doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000185698.45720.58 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tomsick T (2007) TIMI, TIBI, TICI: I came, I saw, I got confused. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 28:382–384CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kallmes DF (2012) TICI: if you are not confused, then you are not paying attention. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 33:975–976. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2905 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zaidat OO, Lazzaro MA, Liebeskind DS et al (2012) Revascularization grading in endovascular acute ischemic stroke therapy. Neurology 79:S110–S116. doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182695916 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Saver JL, Albers GW, Dunn B et al (2009) Stroke Therapy Academic Industry Roundtable (STAIR) recommendations for extended window acute stroke therapy trials. Stroke 40:2594–2600. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.552554 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Saver JL, Liebeskind DS, Nogueira RG, Jahan R (2010) Need to clarify Thrombolysis In Myocardial Ischemia (TIMI) scale scoring method in the penumbra pivotal stroke trial. Stroke 41:e115–e116. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.566406 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Soares BP, Chien JD, Wintermark M (2009) MR and CT monitoring of recanalization, reperfusion, and penumbra salvage: everything that recanalizes does not necessarily reperfuse! Stroke 40:S24–S27. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.526814 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chueh JY, Wakhloo AK, Hendricks GH et al (2011) Mechanical characterization of thromboemboli in acute ischemic stroke and laboratory embolus analogs. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 32:1237–1244. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2485 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fugate JE, Klunder AM, Kallmes DF (2013) What is meant by “TICI”? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 34:1792–1797. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3496 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Qureshi AI (2002) New grading system for angiographic evaluation of arterial occlusions and recanalization response to intra-arterial thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke. Neurosurgery 50:1405–1414, discussion 1414–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Broderick JP, Palesch YY, Demchuk AM et al (2013) Endovascular therapy after intravenous t-PA versus t-PA alone for stroke. N Engl J Med 368:893–903. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1214300 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kidwell CS, Jahan R, Gornbein J et al (2013) A trial of imaging selection and endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 368:914–923. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1212793 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ciccone A, Valvassori L, Nichelatti M et al (2013) Endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 368:904–913. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1213701 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Del Zoppo GJ, Ferbert A, Otis S et al (1988) Local intra-arterial fibrinolytic therapy in acute carotid territory stroke. A pilot study. Stroke 19:307–313. doi:10.1161/01.STR.19.3.307 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mori E, Tabuchi M, Yoshida T, Yamadori A (1988) Intracarotid urokinase with thromboembolic occlusion of the middle cerebral artery. Stroke 19:802–812CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mori E, Yoneda Y, Tabuchi M et al (1992) Intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator in acute carotid artery territory stroke. Neurology 42:976–982CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    The TIMI Study Group (1985) The Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) trial. Phase I findings. TIMI Study Group. N Engl J Med 312:932–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Del Zoppo GJ, Higashida RT, Furlan AJ et al (1998) PROACT: a phase II randomized trial of recombinant pro-urokinase by direct arterial delivery in acute middle cerebral artery stroke. PROACT Investigators. Prolyse in Acute Cerebral Thromboembolism. Stroke 29:4–11CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Furlan A, Higashida R, Wechsler L et al (1999) Intra-arterial prourokinase for acute ischemic stroke. The PROACT II study: a randomized controlled trial. Prolyse in Acute Cerebral Thromboembolism. JAMA 282:2003–2011CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lewandowski CA, Frankel M, Tomsick TA et al (1999) Combined intravenous and intra-arterial r-TPA versus intra-arterial therapy of acute ischemic stroke: Emergency Management of Stroke (EMS) Bridging Trial. Stroke 30:2598–2605. doi:10.1161/01.STR.30.12.2598 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fields JD, Lutsep HL, Smith WS (2011) Higher degrees of recanalization after mechanical thrombectomy for acute stroke are associated with improved outcome and decreased mortality: pooled analysis of the MERCI and Multi MERCI trials. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 32:2170–2174. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2709 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Saver JL, Jahan R, Levy EI et al (2012) Solitaire flow restoration device versus the Merci Retriever in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (SWIFT): a randomised, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 380:1241–1249. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61384-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Higashida RT, Furlan AJ, Roberts H et al (2003) Trial design and reporting standards for intra-arterial cerebral thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 34:e109–e137. doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000082721.62796.09 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    IMS II Trial Investigators (2007) The Interventional Management of Stroke (IMS) II Study. Stroke 38:2127–35. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.483131
  26. 26.
    Noser EA, Shaltoni HM, Hall CE et al (2005) Aggressive mechanical clot disruption: a safe adjunct to thrombolytic therapy in acute stroke? Stroke 36:292–296. doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000152331.93770.18 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Almekhlafi MA, Mishra S, Desai JA et al (2014) Not all “successful” angiographic reperfusion patients are an equal validation of a modified TICI scoring system. Interv Neuroradiol 20:21–27CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zaidat OO, Yoo AJ, Khatri P et al (2013) Recommendations on angiographic revascularization grading standards for acute ischemic stroke: a consensus statement. Stroke. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.001972 Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Türe U, Yaşargil MG, Al-Mefty O, Yaşargil DC (2000) Arteries of the insula. J Neurosurg 92:676–687. doi:10.3171/jns.2000.92.4.0676 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Khatri P, Broderick JP, Khoury JC et al (2008) Microcatheter contrast injections during intra-arterial thrombolysis may increase intracranial hemorrhage risk. Stroke 39:3283–3287. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.522904 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hui FK, Yim J, Spiotta AM et al (2012) Intermediate catheter injections in closed segments during acute stroke intervention: a cautionary note. J Neurointerv Surg 4:e39. doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2011-010163 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Liebeskind DS, Flint AC, Budzik RF et al (2014) Carotid I’s, L’s and T’s: collaterals shape the outcome of intracranial carotid occlusion in acute ischemic stroke. J Neurointerv Surg. doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011231 PubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nogueira RG, Lutsep HL, Gupta R et al (2012) Trevo versus Merci retrievers for thrombectomy revascularisation of large vessel occlusions in acute ischaemic stroke (TREVO 2): a randomised trial. Lancet 380:1231–1240. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61299-9 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dorn F, Kuntze-Soderqvist A, Popp S et al (2012) Early venous drainage after successful endovascular recanalization in ischemic stroke—a predictor for final infarct volume? Neuroradiology 54:745–751. doi:10.1007/s00234-011-0966-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ohta H, Nakano S, Yokogami K et al (2004) Appearance of early venous filling during intra-arterial reperfusion therapy for acute middle cerebral artery occlusion: a predictive sign for hemorrhagic complications. Stroke 35:893–898. doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000119751.92640.7F CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ames A, Wright RL, Kowada M et al (1968) Cerebral ischemia. II. The no-reflow phenomenon. Am J Pathol 52:437–453PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Soares BP, Tong E, Hom J et al (2010) Reperfusion is a more accurate predictor of follow-up infarct volume than recanalization: a proof of concept using CT in acute ischemic stroke patients. Stroke 41:e34–e40. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.568766 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hussein HM, Georgiadis AL, Vazquez G et al (2010) Occurrence and predictors of futile recanalization following endovascular treatment among patients with acute ischemic stroke: a multicenter study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 31:454–458. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bar M, Mikulik R, Jonszta T et al (2012) Diagnosis of recanalization of the intracranial artery has poor inter-rater reliability. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 33:972–974. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2896 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gaha M, Roy C, Estrade L et al (2014) Inter- and intraobserver agreement in scoring angiographic results of intra-arterial stroke therapy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3828 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Suh SH, Cloft HJ, Fugate JE et al (2013) Clarifying differences among thrombolysis in cerebral infarction scale variants: is the artery half open or half closed? Stroke 44:1166–1168. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.000399 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Yoo AJ, Simonsen CZ, Prabhakaran S et al (2013) Refining angiographic biomarkers of revascularization: improving outcome prediction after intra-arterial therapy. Stroke 44:2509–2512. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.001990 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Molina CA (2010) Futile recanalization in mechanical embolectomy trials: a call to improve selection of patients for revascularization. Stroke 41:842–843. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.580266 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Arnold M, Nedeltchev K, Schroth G et al (2004) Clinical and radiological predictors of recanalisation and outcome of 40 patients with acute basilar artery occlusion treated with intra-arterial thrombolysis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 75:857–862CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Schonewille WJ, Wijman CAC, Michel P et al (2009) Treatment and outcomes of acute basilar artery occlusion in the Basilar Artery International Cooperation Study (BASICS): a prospective registry study. Lancet Neurol 8:724–730. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70173-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lindsberg PJ, Mattle HP (2006) Therapy of basilar artery occlusion: a systematic analysis comparing intra-arterial and intravenous thrombolysis. Stroke 37:922–928. doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000202582.29510.6b CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Frölich AMJ, Psychogios MN, Klotz E et al (2012) Antegrade flow across incomplete vessel occlusions can be distinguished from retrograde collateral flow using 4-dimensional computed tomographic angiography. Stroke 43:2974–2979. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.668889 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johannes C. Gerber
    • 1
  • Yves J. Miaux
    • 2
  • Rüdiger von Kummer
    • 1
  1. 1.Neuroradiology, Medizinische Fakultät Carl Gustav CarusTechnische Universität DresdenDresdenGermany
  2. 2.SynarcNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations