Explore the vast range of titles available.

In this trial involving 543 patients with stroke due to occlusion of medium or distal vessels, endovascular treatment within 24 hours after the onset of symptoms was not effective in improving functional outcome at 90 days.

Patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) require revascularization to improve limb perfusion and thereby limit the risk of amputation. It is uncertain whether an initial strategy of endovascular therapy or surgical revascularization for CLTI is superior for improving limb outcomes. In this international, randomized trial, we enrolled 1830 patients with CLTI and infrainguinal peripheral artery disease in two parallel-cohort trials. Patients who had a single segment of great saphenous vein that could be used for surgery were assigned to cohort 1. Patients who needed an alternative bypass conduit were assigned to cohort 2. The primary outcome was a composite of a major adverse limb event - which was defined as amputation above the ankle or a major limb reintervention (a new bypass graft or graft revision, thrombectomy, or thrombolysis) - or death from any cause. In cohort 1, after a median follow-up of 2.7 years, a primary-outcome event occurred in 302 of 709 patients (42.6%) in the surgical group and in 408 of 711 patients (57.4%) in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59 to 0.79; P<0.001). In cohort 2, a primary-outcome event occurred in 83 of 194 patients (42.8%) in the surgical group and in 95 of 199 patients (47.7%) in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.06; P = 0.12) after a median follow-up of 1.6 years. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups in the two cohorts. Among patients with CLTI who had an adequate great saphenous vein for surgical revascularization (cohort 1), the incidence of a major adverse limb event or death was significantly lower in the surgical group than in the endovascular group. Among the patients who lacked an adequate saphenous vein conduit (cohort 2), the outcomes in the two groups were similar. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; BEST-CLI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02060630.).

In 340 Chinese patients with basilar-artery occlusion, endovascular treatment resulted in better neurologic outcomes than medical care. Approximately one third of patients underwent intravenous thrombolysis.

In a trial conducted in China, patients with large cerebral infarctions as determined by imaging criteria within 24 hours after onset had better outcomes with endovascular therapy than with medical therapy alone.

Trials of the efficacy and safety of endovascular thrombectomy in patients with large ischemic strokes have been carried out in limited populations. We performed a prospective, randomized, open-label, adaptive, international trial involving patients with stroke due to occlusion of the internal carotid artery or the first segment of the middle cerebral artery to assess endovascular thrombectomy within 24 hours after onset. Patients had a large ischemic-core volume, defined as an Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score of 3 to 5 (range, 0 to 10, with lower scores indicating larger infarction) or a core volume of at least 50 ml on computed tomography perfusion or diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to endovascular thrombectomy plus medical care or to medical care alone. The primary outcome was the modified Rankin scale score at 90 days (range, 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability). Functional independence was a secondary outcome. The trial was stopped early for efficacy; 178 patients had been assigned to the thrombectomy group and 174 to the medical-care group. The generalized odds ratio for a shift in the distribution of modified Rankin scale scores toward better outcomes in favor of thrombectomy was 1.51 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20 to 1.89; P<0.001). A total of 20% of the patients in the thrombectomy group and 7% in the medical-care group had functional independence (relative risk, 2.97; 95% CI, 1.60 to 5.51). Mortality was similar in the two groups. In the thrombectomy group, arterial access-site complications occurred in 5 patients, dissection in 10, cerebral-vessel perforation in 7, and transient vasospasm in 11. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred in 1 patient in the thrombectomy group and in 2 in the medical-care group. Among patients with large ischemic strokes, endovascular thrombectomy resulted in better functional outcomes than medical care but was associated with vascular complications. Cerebral hemorrhages were infrequent in both groups. (Funded by Stryker Neurovascular; SELECT2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03876457.).

In a Chinese trial, endovascular thrombectomy at 6 to 24 hours led to more good outcomes than standard care but also to more cerebral hemorrhages. Approximately 20% of patients received intravenous thrombolysis.

Endovascular therapy for stroke is generally avoided if the cerebral infarction is large. In a trial conducted in Japan, the percentage of patients who had a good functional outcome at 90 days was higher with endovascular therapy than with medical care, but there were more cerebral hemorrhages with endovascular therapy.

In a trial involving patients with ischemic stroke due to medium-vessel occlusion, thrombectomy within 12 hours did not lead to a better functional outcome and lower mortality at 90 days than usual care.

Among 550 patients with stroke due to large-vessel occlusion who had presented within 4.5 hours after onset, 90-day functional outcomes were better with intravenous tenecteplase before thrombectomy than with thrombectomy alone.

In patients with acute ischemic stroke, endovascular therapy (intraarterial t-PA, mechanical clot disruption or retrieval, or a combination of these) did not achieve superior clinical outcomes as compared with intravenous t-PA. Intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) is the standard treatment for acute ischemic stroke, but more than half the treated patients do not recover completely or die. 1 Alternative treatments, such as endovascular treatment, have been used for many years. As compared with endovascular treatment, intravenous thrombolysis is associated with a lower probability of recanalization 2 – 9 (46% of cases with intravenous t-PA vs. >80% with endovascular treatment 10 – 15 ). Nevertheless, the two approaches have not been directly compared, recanalization is not invariably associated with a favorable clinical outcome, 16 and it is not known whether clinical outcomes are superior with endovascular therapy . . .