Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

Welcome to the new AJNR, Updated Hall of Fame, and more. Read the full announcements.


AJNR is seeking candidates for the position of Associate Section Editor, AJNR Case Collection. Read the full announcement.

 

Research ArticleInterventional

Glasgow Coma Scale on Presentation Predicts Outcome in Endovascular Treatment for Acute Posterior Large-Vessel Occlusion

A.H. Chiu, D.A. Hince and W. McAuliffe
American Journal of Neuroradiology April 2020, 41 (4) 645-649; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A6497
A.H. Chiu
aFrom the Neurological Intervention and Imaging Service of Western Australia (A.H.C., W.M.), Western Australia Health, Sir Charles Gairdner, Royal Perth, and Fiona Stanley Hospitals, Perth, Australia
bMedical School, Division of Medicine (A.H.C., W.M.), University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for A.H. Chiu
D.A. Hince
cInstitute for Health Research (D.A.H.), University of Notre Dame, Fremantle, Australia.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for D.A. Hince
W. McAuliffe
aFrom the Neurological Intervention and Imaging Service of Western Australia (A.H.C., W.M.), Western Australia Health, Sir Charles Gairdner, Royal Perth, and Fiona Stanley Hospitals, Perth, Australia
bMedical School, Division of Medicine (A.H.C., W.M.), University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for W. McAuliffe
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

SUMMARY: Use of mechanical thrombectomy for stroke has increased since the publication of trials describing outcome improvement when used in the anterior circulation. These results, however, cannot be directly translated to the posterior circulation. While a high NIHSS score has demonstrated an association with poor outcomes in posterior stroke, the NIHSS is weighted toward hemispheric disease, and complex scores potentially delay definitive imaging diagnosis. We performed a retrospective analysis to ascertain whether any rapidly obtainable demographic or clinical and imaging data have a correlation with patient outcome postthrombectomy. Seventy-three cases were audited between September 2010 and October 2017. Presenting with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of >13 meant that the odds of reaching the primary end point of functional independence (defined as a 90-day modified Rankin Scale score of 0–2) were 5.70 times greater; similarly, presenting with a posterior circulation ASPECTS of  >9 resulted in the odds of reaching the primary end point being 4.03 times greater. Older age correlated to a lower odds of independence (0.97, p = .04).

ABBREVIATIONS:

F-mTICI
final modified TICI score
GCS
Glasgow Coma Scale
I-mTICI
initial modified TICI score
MT
mechanical thrombectomy
mTICI
modified TICI
PC
posterior circulation
PLVO
posterior large-vessel occlusion
RACE
Rapid Arterial oCclusion Evaluation

The caseload of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for stroke has increased since the publication of trials1⇓⇓⇓⇓-6 describing the benefit in the anterior circulation. Given the questionable efficacy of IV-tPA in the treatment of posterior circulation stroke, endovascular treatment has long been considered an option for posterior large-vessel occlusion (PLVO).6⇓-8 Trials pertaining to the anterior circulation, however, cannot be translated directly to PLVO. While a high NIHSS score has also been associated with poor outcomes in posterior stroke,9,10 this association has been questioned,11,12 given that the NIHSS is weighted toward hemispheric disease.13 Other scales14 have been suggested to increase the accuracy in posterior strokes; however, the use of these complex scores potentially delays the imaging diagnosis, which is unarguably more definitive for guiding management. We thus sought to identify whether any rapidly obtainable demographic or clinical- and imaging-related data that are routinely collected for PLVO have a correlation with outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Background

Our neurointerventional service has, for >10 years, been organized as a single multisite state department encompassing 3 tertiary/quaternary hospitals, providing all elective and acute neurovascular services. During data collection, stroke care underwent an evolution from a neurology-driven thrombolysis service (organized per hospital) to a state-wide MT-driven system. Ambulance triage using the Rapid Arterial oCclusion Evaluation score (RACE)15 was implemented in 2016. Ambulances would be diverted to 1 of 2 MT centers on the basis of the RACE, and on arrival to the emergency department, a “code stroke” was activated.

As the service grew, the decision to proceed to MT evolved. Use of the NIHSS became sporadic, given the nature of PLVO but also because of the availability of RACE and increasingly expeditious transfer to CT. The NIHSS was hence not included in the study. Imaging protocols were hospital-dependent but included noncontrast CT brain and CTA; use of perfusion varied. MR imaging was not performed routinely before intervention. Decision-making evolved to a parallel model with neurology and neurointervention teams attending every code stroke, with the decision for IV-tPA and/or MT made collaboratively. MT was performed with the patient under general anesthetic using stent retriever a or suction techniques, with use of balloon-guide catheters and/or distal-access catheters per operator preference.

Data Collection

This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected audit data base encompassing all cases at all 3 hospitals. Adult patients treated between September 2010 and October 2017 with MT for an intracranial PLVO were included. Demographics collected include age, sex, and time of onset (or wake-up/unknown-onset). Clinical parameters collected included the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score on presentation, and whether IV-tPA was administered. Imaging was reviewed, and the extent of infarction on pretreatment noncontrast brain CT was graded per the posterior circulation ASPECTS (PC-ASPECTS) score.16 The presence of posterior communicating arteries and the level of occlusion were assessed on CTA; if this assessment was not possible, information was sought on treatment angiography. Thrombectomy-related data included the initial modified TICI (I-mTICI) score, final modified TICI score (F-mTICI; both with modified TICI [mTICI] 3 defined by the entire basilar territory), and time of recanalization. Safety data recorded included procedural complications, separated into clinically relevant or technical (intracranial perforation/extravasation, nonterritory embolism, or vessel dissection), imaging complications on routine day 1 noncontrast brain CT (subarachnoid/intraparenchymal hemorrhage, subdivided into symptomatic/asymptomatic), and clinically relevant access complications (vascular occlusion, percutaneous thrombin treatment, transfusion, or surgical repair). The 3-month mRS score was determined at routine 3-month outpatient clinic. The primary end point was defined as functional independence, which was defined as a 3-month mRS of ≤2. The diagnosis for the cause of stroke (cardiogenic, intracranial/extracranial atheroma, dissection, paradoxical, iatrogenic, or otherwise) was recorded. Missing data were retrieved from medical records and the PACS.

Statistical Analysis

Descriptive data are presented using means/SDs, median/interquartile ranges, and frequency/percentage as appropriate. The relationship between mRS and predictors of interest (time to recanalization, GCS, IV-tPA, sex, age, and PC-ASPECTS) was considered using univariable and multivariable logistic regression models. The multivariable model was developed using backward elimination, and P < .05 was used to determine predictor inclusion in the model. The association between mRS and F-mTICI (dichotomized as 0–2a versus 2b–3) was assessed using the Fisher exact test because this variable perfectly predicts the mRS and therefore a logistic model cannot be fitted. Similarly, the relationship between mRS and I-mTICI was considered with the Fisher test because of the small sample size in the 2b–3 group. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve for significant predictors of interest were determined using a cutoff value that produced the maximum product of sensitivity and specificity in predicting the primary end point.17 The probability cutoff from the final multivariable model was determined in the same way and was used to assess the prediction performance of this model. A bootstrap procedure (with 100 repetitions) was used to determine the 95% confidence interval for these cut-points. All analyses were conducted using STATA, Version 15.0 (StataCorp, College Station, Texas), and P < .05 was considered significant.

The study was reviewed and approved by the local institutional review board for audit processes (Governance Evidence Knowledge Outcomes [GEKO] System, Department of Health, Western Australia).

RESULTS

Seventy-nine cases were recorded; 6 patients were excluded due to incomplete follow-up data. Of the 73 remaining, 26 patients (35.62%) were women. Ages ranged from 18 to 92 years (mean, 64.11 ± 15.51 years). The time of onset of stroke was unknown in 14 patients (19.18%), and the median presentation GCS was 10 (interquartile range, 8). A breakdown of presentation PC-ASPECTS, posterior communicating artery status, and level of occlusion is given in Table 1. IV-tPA was administered in 11/73 patients (15.07%). I-mTICI 0 was seen in 66/73 (90.41%); F-mTICI  ≥  2b was achieved in 63 (86.30%). Further breakdown is provided in Table 1. The median total time of ictus to recanalization was 6.5 hours (interquartile range, 8.2 hours).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1:

Initial and final mTICI for the 73 patients with complete data

The procedural complication rate was 4.11% (3.80% when including 6 patients with missing 3-month data); this consisted of 2 cases of perforation, and 1 technical complication (dissection) that was non-flow-limiting and did not contribute to patient deterioration.

Postprocedurally, there were 2 cases of new symptomatic intraparenchymal hemorrhage (considered natural history), 1 symptomatic SAH (1 of the perforations), and 1 of access complication requiring both percutaneous thrombin injection and blood transfusion, for a delayed complication rate of 5.48% (5.06% when including 6 patients with missing 3-month data). Final outcomes are listed in the On-line Table.

At 3-month follow-up, 25 patients (34.25%) reached the primary end point (mRS ≤ 2). The most common cause for PLVO was cardiogenic with 26/73 cases (35.62%), followed by intracranial atheroma in 20 (27.40%); details are provided in Table 2. Twenty-five patients (34.25%) died.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2:

Final documented causes for posterior circulatory occlusion in the 73 patients with complete data

GCS, PC-ASPECTS, and age were found to be significant predictors (Table 3). Presenting with a GCS of >13 meant that the odds of reaching the primary end point were 5.70 times greater; similarly, presenting with a PC-ASPECTS of >9 resulted in the odds of reaching the primary end point being 4.03 times greater. No cut-point could be found for age. These are also significant on the multivariable model; a predicted probability of 0.32 (95% CI, 0.18–0.46) has a sensitivity of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.61–0.95) and specificity of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.55–0.84) for mRS ≤ 2. This produces an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.77 (95% CI, 0.55–0.84). Details are listed in Table 4. No correlation was seen for IV-tPA, sex, or time from ictus to recanalization (Table 3). F-mTICI ≥ 2b was significant for predicting mRS ≤ 2, whereas I-mTICI was not (Table 5). Given the difficulty in meaningfully categorizing the level of occlusion and the robustness of the posterior communicating arteries, the frequencies were found to be too small to model; however, a breakdown is provided in Table 1.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3:

Univariable and multivariable odds ratios for the association between each predictor variable and binary mRS (where mRS >2 is the reference group)

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4:

Univariable odds ratios, sensitivities, specificities, and area under ROC curves for the association between each predictor variable and binary mRS (where mRS >2 is the reference group)

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 5:

Cross-tabulation and χ2 analyses for the association between mRS (0–2 vs 3–6) and binary mTICI measures in the 73 patients with complete data

For completeness, in the 6 patients who had incomplete follow-up data, 2 were women. All presented with an I-mTICI of 0. F-mTICI consisted of 0 (n = 1), 2a (n = 2), 2b (n = 1), and 3 (n = 2). Causes of stroke were cardiogenic (n = 1), extracranial atheroma (n = 1), iatrogenic (n = 1), intracranial atheroma (n = 2), and unknown (n = 1).

DISCUSSION

With MT, our workflow surrounding patients with stroke has changed to prehospital activation, assessment by multiple specialties, and patient transfer from the ambulance to the emergency department, through imaging, and potentially to the neurointerventional suite. Because of the potential time lost, there is interest in how time may be saved. While complex clinical scores may give an edge to prognostication, even the well-studied NIHSS has not been demonstrated to perform better; Turc et al18 found, in 1004 patients, that cut-points of NIHSS ≥ 11 and RACE ≥ 5 both achieved accuracies of 79% for large-vessel occlusion, but with the NIHSS only demonstrating a 5% improvement in the false-negative rate (27% versus 33%, respectively) and an inferior false-positive rate (17% versus 15%, respectively). Introducing more scores increases interoperator variability, especially when a mix of junior and senior clinicians is involved, as is the reality of acute stroke care. The additive value of these scores to actual patient care, in this time-sensitive environment, must hence be questioned.

Most studies suggest poorer outcomes for PLVO compared with anterior circulatory large-vessel occlusion,19,20 but these also generally demonstrate a longer ictus-to-recanalization time. Alawieh et al,21 however published an analysis of 536 patients in which there was no significant difference in onset-to-groin times between anterior and posterior circulation thrombectomies (or procedural times) and correlating equivalent functional outcomes. Although we did not find an association between ictus to recanalization and outcome, the above study continues to reinforce the need to minimize time lost.

Our results are notable in that favorable GCS and PC-ASPECTS scores predict significant odds of functional independence. GCS demonstrated a trend toward significance in an earlier article by Mourand et al,22 albeit with a smaller population of 31 patients. The GCS has been considered a biomarker for outcome previously; however, in these studies it was either used in a different timeframe, in patients treated without thrombolysis or thrombectomy, solely with thrombolysis, or with outdated devices such as the Merci Retriever System (Concentric Medical, Mountain View, CA),23⇓-25 all of which have little relevance to modern thrombectomy. The relevance of established infarct at presentation to outcome is self-explanatory, but the cut-point of >9 suggests that any established infarction is clinically relevant. While a cut-point for age could not be established, for each year of increasing age, a 3%–5% decrease in the odds of mRS ≤ 2 is also expected and confirms the long-reported association of age with outcome in stroke.9,26,27 A F-mTICI ≥ 2b was also significant for mRS ≤ 2, similar to other studies for the posterior circulation, confirming the importance of reperfusion, similar to that in the anterior circulation.3,28 Our outcomes for mTICI ≥ 2b (86.30%) and mRS ≤ 2 (34.25%) are comparable with those in other articles specifically assessing endovascular treatment of basilar artery occlusion9,10,28⇓-30 and on the lower end of reported mortality rates of 25%–47%.10,29

Our study has a number of limitations. First, the nature of this single-service cohort means that there is self-adjudication. Second, patient numbers analyzed remained low; however, this finding reflects the lower proportion of PLVO as a part of stroke presentations overall. This number has affected some of our analyses, such as our ability to analyze the effect of the level of occlusion and the robustness of collaterals; however, we resisted the urge to further group these because doing so would create categories that share little clinical similarity. Third, there is heterogeneity in our prehospital process, in-hospital management, and endovascular therapy during the 7-year data collection, but this reflects the real-life evolution of treatment. It is possible that current outcomes may be better. Last, we did not seek to assess a broader range of clinical parameters such as serum glucose level, medical history, anticoagulation and other medications, and, of course, the NIHSS and hence could not include these in the analysis. However, this feature reflects the reality of endovascular stroke care: Much of the information above may not be immediately available at time of decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that the presentation GCS, a rapidly calculated and well-understood clinical score for all clinician groups and seniorities, has correlation with patient outcome after posterior circulation MT. Absence of an identifiable infarction on presentation CT portends a better prognosis. We also confirm that functional independence is affected by recanalization and age.

Given the poor outcome of untreated PLVO, there is a tendency to treat patients regardless of presentation status and at longer timeframes. While this practice theoretically gives the patient the best possible chance of recovery, if through future research a point of futility can be established, then better use of health care resources can be established. The result of our study furthers this aim and, in the meantime, may give some guidance to clinical decision-making and informed consent.

Footnotes

  • Disclosures: Dana A. Hince—RELATED: Grant: Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Comments: The institute I work for has a tendered agreement with Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital to provide statistical support/data analysis to employees of that institution. My income is not dependent on this source, and I have received no money for the work I completed for this article.* *Money paid to the institution.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Campbell BC,
    2. Mitchell PJ,
    3. Kleinig TJ, et al
    ; EXTEND-IA Investigators. Endovascular therapy for ischemic stroke with perfusion-imaging selection. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1009–18 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1414792 pmid:25671797
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Berkhemer OA,
    2. Fransen PS,
    3. Beumer D, et al
    ; MR CLEAN Investigators. A randomized trial of intraarterial treatment for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2015;372:11–20 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1411587 pmid:25517348
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Goyal M,
    2. Demchuk AM,
    3. Menon BK, et al
    ; ESCAPE Trial Investigators. Randomized assessment of rapid endovascular treatment of ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1019–30 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1414905 pmid:25671798
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Saver JL,
    2. Goyal M,
    3. Bonafé A, et al
    ; SWIFT PRIME Investigators. Stent-retriever thrombectomy after intravenous t-PA vs. t-PA alone in stroke. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2285–95 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1415061 pmid:25882376
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Jovin TG,
    2. Chamorro A,
    3. Cobo E, et al
    ; REVASCAT Trial Investigators. Thrombectomy within 8 hours after symptom onset in ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2296–2306 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1503780 pmid:25882510
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Bracard S,
    2. Ducrocq X,
    3. Mas JL, et al
    ; THRACE investigators. Mechanical Thrombectomy After Intravenous Alteplase versus Alteplase Alone after Stroke (THRACE): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol 2016;15:1138–47 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(16)30177-6 pmid:27567239
    CrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Nagel S,
    2. Kellert L,
    3. Möhlenbruch M, et al
    . Improved clinical outcome after acute basilar artery occlusion since the introduction of endovascular thrombectomy devices. Cerebrovasc Dis 2013;36:394–400 doi:10.1159/000356185 pmid:24246933
    CrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Schonewille WJ,
    2. Wijman CA,
    3. Michel P, et al
    ; BASICS study group. Treatment and outcomes of acute basilar artery occlusion in the Basilar Artery International Cooperation Study (BASICS): a prospective registry study. Lancet Neurol 2009;8:724–30 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70173-5 pmid:19577962
    CrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Singer OC,
    2. Berkefeld J,
    3. Nolte CH, et al
    ; ENDOSTROKE Study Group. Mechanical recanalization in basilar artery occlusion: the ENDOSTROKE study. Ann Neurol 2015;77:415–24 doi:10.1002/ana.24336 pmid:25516154
    CrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Luo G,
    2. Mo D,
    3. Tong X, et al
    . Factors associated with 90-day outcomes of patients with acute posterior circulation stroke treated by mechanical thrombectomy. World Neurosurg 2018;109:e318–28 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2017.09.171 pmid:28987852
    CrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Inoa V,
    2. Aron AW,
    3. Staff I, et al
    . Lower NIH stroke scale scores are required to accurately predict a good prognosis in posterior circulation stroke. Cerebrovasc Dis 2014;37:251–55 doi:10.1159/000358869 pmid:24686370
    CrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Heldner MR,
    2. Zubler C,
    3. Mattle HP, et al
    . National Institutes of Health stroke scale score and vessel occlusion in 2152 patients with acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 2013;44:1153–57 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.000604 pmid:23471266
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Schneck MJ
    . Current stroke scales may be partly responsible for worse outcomes in posterior circulation stroke. Stroke 2018;49:2565–66 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.118.023201 pmid:30355229
    CrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Olivato S,
    2. Nizzoli S,
    3. Cavazzuti M, et al
    . e-NIHSS: an expanded National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale weighted for anterior and posterior circulation strokes. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2016;25:2953–57 doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2016.08.011 pmid:27693107
    CrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Pérez de la Ossa N,
    2. Carrera D,
    3. Gorchs M, et al
    . Design and validation of a prehospital stroke scale to predict large arterial occlusion: the rapid arterial occlusion evaluation scale. Stroke 2014;45:87–91 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.003071 pmid:24281224
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Puetz V,
    2. Sylaja PN,
    3. Coutts SB, et al
    . Extent of hypoattenuation on CT angiography source images predicts functional outcome in patients with basilar artery occlusion. Stroke 2008;39:2485–90 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.511162 pmid:18617663
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    1. Liu X
    . Classification accuracy and cut point selection. Stat Med 2012;31:2676–86 doi:10.1002/sim.4509 pmid:22307964
    CrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Turc G,
    2. Maïer B,
    3. Naggara O, et al
    . Clinical scales do not reliably identify acute ischemic stroke patients with large-artery occlusion. Stroke 2016;47:1466–72 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.013144 pmid:27125526
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  19. 19.↵
    1. Alonso de Leciñana M,
    2. Kawiorski MM,
    3. Ximénez-Carrillo Á, et al
    ; Madrid Stroke Network. Mechanical thrombectomy for basilar artery thrombosis: a comparison of outcomes with anterior circulation occlusions. J Neurointerv Surg 2017;9:1173–78 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012797 pmid:27998956
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. Serles W,
    2. Gattringer T,
    3. Mutzenbach S, et al
    ; Austrian Stroke Unit Registry Collaborators. Endovascular stroke therapy in Austria: a nationwide 1-year experience. Eur J Neurol 2016;23:906–11 doi:10.1111/ene.12958 pmid:26843095
    CrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Alawieh A,
    2. Vargas J,
    3. Turner RD, et al
    . Equivalent favorable outcomes possible after thrombectomy for posterior circulation large vessel occlusion compared with the anterior circulation: the MUSC experience. J Neurointerv Surg 2018;10:735–40 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013420 pmid:29222394
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Mourand I,
    2. Machi P,
    3. Milhaud D, et al
    . Mechanical thrombectomy with the Solitaire device in acute basilar artery occlusion. J Neurointerv Surg 2014;6:200–04 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2012-010629 pmid:23645572
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    1. Mansour OY,
    2. Megahed MM,
    3. Elghany E
    . Acute ischemic stroke prognostication, comparison between Glasgow Coma Score, NIHS Scale and Full Outline of UnResponsiveness Score in intensive care unit. Alexandria Journal of Medicine 2015;51:247–53 doi:10.1016/j.ajme.2014.10.002
    CrossRef
  24. 24.↵
    1. Tsao JW,
    2. Hemphill JC,
    3. Johnston SC, et al
    . Initial Glasgow Coma Scale score predicts outcome following thrombolysis for posterior circulation stroke. Arch Neurol 2005;62:1126–29 doi:10.1001/archneur.62.7.1126 pmid:16009770
    CrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Chandra RV,
    2. Law CP,
    3. Yan B, et al
    . Glasgow Coma Scale does not predict outcome post-intra-arterial treatment for basilar artery thrombosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:576–80 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2325 pmid:21349965
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    1. Nakayama H,
    2. Jørgensen HS,
    3. Raaschou HO, et al
    . The influence of age on stroke outcome: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Stroke 1994;25:808–13 doi:10.1161/01.str.25.4.808 pmid:8160225
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    1. Greving JP,
    2. Schonewille WJ,
    3. Wijman CA, et al
    ; BASICS Study Group. Predicting outcome after acute basilar artery occlusion based on admission characteristics. Neurology 2012;78:1058–63 doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e31824e8f40 pmid:22442438
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  28. 28.↵
    1. Mokin M,
    2. Sonig A,
    3. Sivakanthan S, et al
    . Clinical and procedural predictors of outcomes from the endovascular treatment of posterior circulation strokes. Stroke 2016;47:782–88 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.011598 pmid:26888533
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    1. Bouslama M,
    2. Haussen DC,
    3. Aghaebrahim A, et al
    . Predictors of good outcome after endovascular therapy for vertebrobasilar occlusion stroke. Stroke 2017;48:3252–57 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.018270 pmid:29089457
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    1. Gory B,
    2. Eldesouky I,
    3. Sivan-Hoffmann R, et al
    . Outcomes of stent retriever thrombectomy in basilar artery occlusion: an observational study and systematic review. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2016;87:520–25 doi:10.1136/jnnp-2014-310250 pmid:25986363
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  • Received October 18, 2019.
  • Accepted after revision February 19, 2020.
  • © 2020 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 41 (4)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 41, Issue 4
1 Apr 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Glasgow Coma Scale on Presentation Predicts Outcome in Endovascular Treatment for Acute Posterior Large-Vessel Occlusion
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
A.H. Chiu, D.A. Hince, W. McAuliffe
Glasgow Coma Scale on Presentation Predicts Outcome in Endovascular Treatment for Acute Posterior Large-Vessel Occlusion
American Journal of Neuroradiology Apr 2020, 41 (4) 645-649; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A6497

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Glasgow Coma Scale on Presentation Predicts Outcome in Endovascular Treatment for Acute Posterior Large-Vessel Occlusion
A.H. Chiu, D.A. Hince, W. McAuliffe
American Journal of Neuroradiology Apr 2020, 41 (4) 645-649; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A6497
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ABBREVIATIONS:
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSIONS
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Development and validation of machine learning-based model for mortality prediction in patients with acute basilar artery occlusion receiving endovascular treatment: multicentric cohort analysis
  • Crossref (4)
  • Google Scholar

This article has been cited by the following articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

  • Comparison of Nine Early Warning Scores for Identification of Short-Term Mortality in Acute Neurological Disease in Emergency Department
    Carlos Durantez-Fernández, Begoña Polonio-López, José L. Martín-Conty, Clara Maestre-Miquel, Antonio Viñuela, Raúl López-Izquierdo, Laura Mordillo-Mateos, Cristina Jorge-Soto, Martín Otero-Agra, Michele Dileone, Joseba Rabanales-Sotos, Francisco Martín-Rodríguez
    Journal of Personalized Medicine 2022 12 4
  • Development and validation of machine learning-based model for mortality prediction in patients with acute basilar artery occlusion receiving endovascular treatment: multicentric cohort analysis
    Chang Liu, Jiacheng Huang, Weilin Kong, Liyuan Chen, Jiaxing Song, Jie Yang, Fengli Li, Wenjie Zi
    Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery 2024 16 1
  • General anesthesia vs. non-general anesthesia for vertebrobasilar stroke endovascular therapy
    Yanan Lu, Pengfei Xu, Jinjing Wang, Lulu Xiao, Pan Zhang, Zuowei Duan, Dezhi Liu, Chaolai Liu, Delong Wang, Di Wang, Chao Zhang, Tao Yao, Wen Sun, Zhaozhao Cheng, Min Li
    Frontiers in Neurology 2023 14
  • Clinico-topographic evaluation of anterior versus posterior acute ischemic stroke and correlation with early mortality-based scale prediction
    Esra Demir Unal
    eNeurologicalSci 2023 31

More in this TOC Section

  • SAVE vs. Solumbra Techniques for Thrombectomy
  • CT Perfusion&Reperfusion in Acute Ischemic Stroke
  • Delayed Reperfusion Post-Thrombectomy&Thrombolysis
Show more Interventional

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editors Choice
  • Fellow Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

Special Collections

  • Special Collections

Resources

  • News and Updates
  • Turn around Times
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Policies
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Submit a Case
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcast
  • AJNR SCANtastic
  • Video Articles

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Advertise with us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Permissions
  • Terms and Conditions

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire