Abstract
Introduction
Intraarterial thrombolysis and mechanical embolectomy have been studied for endovascular treatment of stroke. The MERCI and Multi MERCI trials of mechanical embolectomy with or without adjuvant intraarterial thrombolysis demonstrated effective recanalization, but with a higher mortality compared with control patients in the PROACT II trial of intraarterial thrombolysis. Differences in trial design may account for this mortality difference.
Methods
We identified patients in the MERCI and Multi MERCI trials who would have been eligible for PROACT II. Rates of good outcome (mRS ≤2) and mortality at 90 days were compared, adjusting for differences in baseline NIHSS score and age.
Results
Sixty-eight patients enrolled in MERCI and 81 enrolled in Multi MERCI were eligible for PROACT II. In both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, PROACT II-eligible embolectomy patients showed a trend toward better clinical outcomes compared to the PROACT II control arm (adjusted, MERCI 35.4% [p = ns], Multi MERCI 42.8% [p = 0.048], PROACT II control, 25.4%). In both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, mortality rates did not significantly differ between embolectomy patients and PROACT II control patients (adjusted analysis, MERCI 29.1%, Multi MERCI 18.0%, PROACT II control, 27.1%). Compared with the PROACT II treatment group, embolectomy groups showed similar rates of good outcome and mortality.
Conclusions
Differences in mortality and proportion of good outcome between the MERCI/Multi MERCI trials and the PROACT II trial are explained by differences in study design and baseline characteristics of patients. Mechanical embolectomy and IA thrombolysis may each be reasonable strategies for acute stroke; a randomized trial is necessary to confirm these results.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1995;333(24):1581–7. doi:10.1056/NEJM199512143332401.
Wahlgren N, Ahmed N, Davalos A, et al. Thrombolysis with alteplase for acute ischaemic stroke in the Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis in Stroke-Monitoring Study (SITS-MOST): an observational study. Lancet. 2007;369(9558):275–82. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60149-4.
Smith WS, Tsao JW, Billings ME, et al. Prognostic significance of angiographically confirmed large vessel intracranial occlusion in patients presenting with acute brain ischemia. Neurocrit Care. 2006;4(1):14–7. doi:10.1385/NCC:4:1:014.
del Zoppo GJ, Higashida RT, Furlan AJ, et al. 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. 1998;29(1):4–11.
Furlan A, Higashida R, Wechsler L, et al. Intra-arterial prourokinase for acute ischemic stroke. The PROACT II study: a randomized controlled trial. Prolyse in Acute Cerebral Thromboembolism. JAMA. 1999;282(21):2003–11. doi:10.1001/jama.282.21.2003.
Ogawa A, Mori E, Minematsu K, et al. Randomized trial of intraarterial infusion of urokinase within 6 hours of middle cerebral artery stroke: the middle cerebral artery embolism local fibrinolytic intervention trial (MELT) Japan. Stroke. 2007;38(10):2633–9.
Smith WS, Sung G, Starkman S, et al. Safety and efficacy of mechanical embolectomy in acute ischemic stroke: results of the MERCI trial. Stroke. 2005;36(7):1432–8.
Smith WS. Safety of mechanical thrombectomy and intravenous tissue plasminogen activator in acute ischemic stroke. Results of the multi Mechanical Embolus Removal in Cerebral Ischemia (MERCI) trial part I. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2006;27(6):1177–82.
Weimar C, Konig IR, Kraywinkel K, et al. Age and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale Score within 6 hours after onset are accurate predictors of outcome after cerebral ischemia: development and external validation of prognostic models. Stroke. 2004;35(1):158–62.
Acknowledgments
We thank Dr. Robin Roberts for his advice and helpful review of this manuscript.
Disclosures
S.A.J: Employed by the University of California that owns a patent on the MERCI device.
W·S.S: Employed by the University of California that owns a patent on the MERCI device; consultant and owns stock in Concentric Medical; research grants from Boehringer Ingelheim; scientific consultant for Talecris and Nuvelo.
J.L.S: Has two NIH funded grants to perform randomized trials of mechanical embolectomy; is an unfunded investigator in an NIH-funded study of intraarterial plasmin; directs the UCLA Stroke Center; is a noninvasive neurologist; speaking honoraria for Boehringer Ingelheim (secondary prevention), Concentric Medical; scientific consultant for ImaRx, Talecris; Ev3; Nuvelo; unpaid site investigator in multicenter trials sponsored by Nuvelo, Boehringer Ingelheim (secondary prevention). Employed by the University of California that owns a patent on the MERCI device.
Authors’ Contributions
SAJ, JLS, WSS: We declare that we participated in the design, data analysis, and writing of this manuscript and that we have seen and approved the final version.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Consortia
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Josephson, S.A., Saver, J.L., Smith, W.S. et al. Comparison of Mechanical Embolectomy and Intraarterial Thrombolysis in Acute Ischemic Stroke within the MCA: MERCI and Multi MERCI compared to PROACT II. Neurocrit Care 10, 43–49 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-008-9167-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-008-9167-7