| Coverage Policy Manual | |
| Policy #: | 2014009 |
| Category: | Surgery |
| Initiated: | April 2014 |
| Last Review: | May 2024 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Endovascular Procedures for Intracranial Arterial Disease and Extracranial Vertebral Artery Disease | |
|
|
|
| Description: |
Intracranial arterial disease includes thromboembolic events, vascular stenoses, and aneurysms. Endovascular techniques have been investigated for the treatment of intracranial arterial disease. Endovascular therapy is used as an alternative or adjunct to intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) and supportive care for acute stenosis and as an adjunct to risk factor modification for chronic stenosis. For cerebral aneurysms, stent-assisted coiling has been evaluated as an alternative to endovascular coiling in patients whose anatomy is not amenable to simple coiling.
Background
Cerebrovascular diseases include a range of processes affecting the cerebral vascular system, including arterial thromboembolism, arterial stenosis, and arterial aneurysms, all of which can lead to restrictions in cerebral blood flow due to ischemia or hemorrhage. Endovascular techniques, including endovascular mechanical embolectomy with various types of devices (i.e., stents) and angioplasty with or without stenting have been investigated for treatment of cerebrovascular diseases.
Acute stroke is the third leading cause of death in the United States; further, it is the leading cause of adult disability (Meyers, 2011). Eighty-seven percent of strokes are ischemic and 13% hemorrhagic. Differentiation between the 2 types of stroke is necessary to determine the appropriate treatment. Ischemic stroke occurs when an artery to the brain is blocked by a blood clot, which forms in the artery (thrombotic), or when another substance (i.e., plaque, fatty material) travels to an artery in the brain causing a blockage (embolism). Recanalization of the artery, particularly in the first few hours after occlusion, reduces rates of disability and death. (Rha, 2007).
Racial differences in the utilization of endovascular therapy for acute stroke have been reported. Sheriff et al analyzed the Get With The Guidelines-Stroke database; between 2015 and 2019, Black patients had lower odds of receiving endovascular therapy compared to non-Hispanic Whites (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 0.90) (Sheriff, 2022). At 3 months, functional independence as assessed by the modified Rankin Scale was less common among Black (aOR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.95) and Asian (aOR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.98) individuals compared to non-Hispanic Whites. de Havenon et al found that Black patients were less likely to receive endovascular therapy compared to White patients (odds ratio [OR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.81) according to National Inpatient Sample data from 2016 to 2018 (de Havenon, 2021). Kim et al conducted a retrospective study of 40,814 acute ischemic strokes that occurred in Texas during 2019 which found that Black patients received endovascular therapy less frequently than White patients (4.1% vs. 5.3%, respectively; adjusted relative risk [aRR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.88; p<.001) despite similar rates of hospital admission (Kim, 2022). The rate of receipt of endovascular therapy was similar between White and Hispanic patients.
It is estimated that intracranial atherosclerosis causes about 8% of all ischemic strokes. Intracranial stenosis may contribute to stroke in two ways: either due to embolism or low-flow ischemia in the absence of collateral circulation. Recurrent annual stroke rates are estimated at 4% to 12% per year with atherosclerosis of the intracranial anterior circulation and 2.5% to 15% per year with lesions of the posterior (vertebrobasilar) circulation.
Compared with acute ischemic stroke, cerebral aneurysms have a much lower incidence in the United States, with prevalence between 0.5% and 6% of the population (Meyers, 2009). However, they are associated with significant morbidity and mortality due to subarachnoid hemorrhage resulting from aneurysm rupture.
The purpose of endovascular interventions in patients experiencing acute ischemic stroke is to remove thrombus and restore blood flow in a timely manner to salvage brain tissue that is not infarcted. The intervention must be performed as quickly as possible during the narrow window during which reperfusion is beneficial.
Regulatory Status
Several devices for endovascular treatment of intracranial arterial disease were cleared for marketing by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) through the 510(k) process or the humanitarian device exemption process. By indication, approved devices are as follows.
Acute Stroke
Intracranial Arterial Stenosis
Two devices were approved by the FDA through the humanitarian device exemption process for atherosclerotic disease. This form of FDA approval is available for devices used to treat conditions with an incidence of 4,000 or less per year; FDA only requires data showing “probable safety and effectiveness.” Devices with their labeled indications are as follows:
Intracranial Aneurysms
In 2011, the Pipeline Embolization Device (Covidien/ eV3 Neurovascular), an intracranial aneurysm flow diverter, was approved by the FDA through the premarket approval process (P100018) for the endovascular treatment of adults (22 years of age or older) with large or giant wide-necked intracranial aneurysms in the internal carotid artery from the petrous to the superior hypophyseal segments (FDA, 2011). Approval was based on the Pipeline for Uncoilable for Failed Aneurysms Study, a single-arm, open-label feasibility study that included 108 patients aged 30 to 75 years with unruptured large and giant wide-necked aneurysms (Becske, 2013).
In 2018, Surpass Streamline Flow Diverter (Stryker Neurovascular) was approved by the FDA through the premarket approval process (P170024) for use in the endovascular treatment of patients (18 years of age and older) with unruptured large or giant saccular wide-neck (neck width 4 mm or greater or dome-to-neck ratio less than 2) or fusiform intracranial aneurysms in the internal carotid artery from the petrous segment to the terminus arising from a parent vessel with a diameter 2.5 mm or greater and 5.3 mm or less. The approval was based on 1-year results of the Surpass Intracranial Aneurysm Embolization System Pivotal Trial to Treat Large or Giant Wide Neck Aneurysms (SCENT) study. The SCENT study is continuing follow-up to 5 years post-procedure as a post-approval study.
The following stents have been approved by the FDA through the Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE) program exemption process for treatment of intracranial aneurysms:
Neuroform Microdelivery Stent System (Stryker). In 2002, based on a series of approximately 30 patients with 6-month follow-up, the Neuroform Microdelivery Stent System was approved (HDE) for use with embolic coils for treatment of wide-neck intracranial aneurysms that cannot be treated by surgical clipping (H020002).
Neuroform Atlas Stent System In 2019, the Neuroform Atlas Stent System (Stryker) was approved by the FDA through the PMA process (P190031) based on the pivotal ATLAS study including 201 patients with up to 12 months of follow-up. The approved indication is "for use with neurovascular embolization coils in the anterior circulation of the neurovasculature for the endovascular treatment of patients greater than or equal to 18 years of age with saccular wide-necked (neck width greater or equal to 4 mm or a dome-to-neck ratio of < 2) intracranial aneurysms arising from a parent vessel with a diameter of greater than or equal to 2.0 mm and less than or equal to 4.5 mm." Product Code: QCA.
Enterprise Vascular Reconstruction Device and Delivery System (Cordis Neurovascular) In 2007, based on a series of approximately 30 patients with 6-month follow-up, the Enterprise™ Vascular Reconstruction Device and Delivery was approved (HDE) for use with embolic coils for treatment of wide-neck, intracranial, saccular or fusiform aneurysms (H060001).
The Low-Profile Visualized Intraluminal Support Device In 2014, the Low-Profile Visualized Intraluminal Support Device (LVIS and LVIS Jr.) (MicroVention) was approved by the FDA through the HDE process (H130005) for use with embolic coils for the treatment of unruptured, wide neck (neck 4 mm or greater or dome to neck ratio less than 2), intracranial, saccular aneurysms arising from a parent vessel with a diameter 2.5 mm or greater and 4.5 mm or smaller. In 2018, the LVIS™ and LVIS™ Jr. were approved through the PMA process (P170013).
PulseRider Aneurysm Neck Reconstruction Device In 2017, the PulseRider Aneurysm Neck Reconstruction Device (Pulsar Vascular, Inc.) was approved by the FDA through the humanitarian device exemption process (H160002) for use with neurovascular embolic coils for treatment of unruptured wide-necked intracranial aneurysms with neck width at least 4 mm or dome to neck ratio greater than 2.
Coding
There are specific CPT codes for intracranial angioplasty and stent placement:
61630: Balloon angioplasty, intracranial (e.g., atherosclerotic stenosis), percutaneous
61635: Transcatheter placement of intravascular stent(s), intracranial (e.g., atherosclerotic stenosis), including balloon angioplasty, if performed
Codes 61630 and 61635 include all selective vascular catheterization of the target vascular family, all diagnostic imaging for arteriography of the target vascular family, and all related radiologic supervision and interpretation. If a diagnostic arteriogram confirmed the need for angioplasty or stent placement, those services are also included in 61630 and 61635.
If occlusion of a vascular malformation is performed as part of the treatment of an aneurysm, code 61624 would be used:
61624: Transcatheter permanent occlusion or embolization (e.g., for tumor destruction, to achieve hemostasis, to occlude a vascular malformation), percutaneous, any method; central nervous system (intracranial, spinal cord).
Effective in 2016, there is a specific CPT code for mechanical thrombectomy:
61645: Percutaneous arterial transluminal mechanical thrombectomy and/or infusion for thrombolysis,
intracranial, any method, including diagnostic angiography, fluoroscopic guidance, catheter placement,
and intraprocedural pharmacological thrombolytic injection(s)
|
|
|
|
|
Policy/ Coverage: |
EFFECTIVE JULY 2024
Meets Primary Coverage Criteria Or Is Covered For Contracts Without Primary Coverage Criteria
Intracranial stent placement (CPT 61630, 61635) meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness as part of the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms for individuals when surgical treatment is not appropriate and standard endovascular techniques do not allow for complete isolation of the aneurysm [e.g., wide-neck aneurysm (4 mm or more) or sack-to-neck ratio less than 2:1].
Intracranial flow diverting stents with FDA approval (e.g., Pipeline Embolization Device) (CPT 61624) for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness as part of the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms that are not amenable to surgical treatment or standard endovascular therapy provided the aneurysm is:
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (CPT 61630, 61635) of intracranial and extracranial vertebral artery stenosis meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in individuals meeting the following criteria:
Percutaneous transluminal intracerebral angioplasty/endovascular balloon dilatation of cerebral arteries for the treatment of vasospasm (CPT 61640, 61641, 61642) meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness.
The use of endovascular mechanical embolectomy with a FDA approved device for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (CPT 61645) meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness as part of the treatment of acute ischemic stroke for individuals who meet ANY of the following sets of criteria:
Does Not Meet Primary Coverage Criteria Or Is Investigational For Contracts Without Primary Coverage Criteria
Intracranial stent placement in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms in circumstances other than noted above does not meet member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness.
For members with contracts without primary coverage criteria, intracranial stent placement in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms in circumstances other than noted above is considered investigational. Investigational services are specific contract exclusions in most member benefit certificates of coverage.
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (CPT 61630, 61635) for the treatment of acute stroke does not meet member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness.
For members with contracts without primary coverage criteria, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting in the treatment of acute stroke are considered investigational. Investigational services are specific contract exclusions in most member benefit certificates of coverage.
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for intracranial artery stenosis other than vertebral artery as indicated above does not meet member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes. This treatment is currently being studied in a clinical trial.
For members with contracts without primary coverage criteria, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for intracranial artery stenosis other than vertebral artery as indicated above is considered investigational. Investigational services are specific contract exclusions in most member benefit certificates of coverage.
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting of intracranial and extracranial vertebral artery stenosis in circumstances other than those noted above do not meet member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness.
For members with contracts without primary coverage criteria, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting of intracranial and extracranial vertebral artery stenosis in circumstances other than those noted above are considered investigational. Investigational services are specific contract exclusions in most member benefit certificates of coverage.
The use of endovascular mechanical embolectomy for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke in circumstances other than noted above does not meet member benefit certificate primary coverage that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes.
For members with contracts without primary coverage criteria, the use of endovascular mechanical embolectomy for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke in circumstances other than noted above is considered investigational. Investigational services are specific contract exclusions in most member benefit certificates of coverage.
EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 2016 TO JUNE 2024
Meets Primary Coverage Criteria Or Is Covered For Contracts Without Primary Coverage Criteria
Intracranial stent placement (CPT 61630, 61635) meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes as part of the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms for patients when surgical treatment is not appropriate and standard endovascular techniques do not allow for complete isolation of the aneurysm, e.g., wide-neck aneurysm (4 mm or more) or sack-to-neck ratio less than 2:1.
Intracranial flow diverting stents with FDA approval (e.g.,Pipeline Embolization Device) (CPT 61624) for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria as part of the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms that are not amenable to surgical treatment or standard endovascular therapy provided the aneurysm is:
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (CPT 61630, 61635) of intracranial and extracranial vertebral artery stenosis meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in patients meeting the following criteria:
Percutaneous transluminal intracerebral angioplasty/endovascular balloon dilatation of cerebral arteries for the treatment of vasospasm (CPT 61640, 61641, 61642) meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes.
The use of endovascular mechanical embolectomy with a device with FDA approval for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (CPT 61645) may be considered medically necessary as part of the treatment of acute ischemic stroke for patients who meet all of the following criteria:
Does Not Meet Primary Coverage Criteria Or Is Investigational For Contracts Without Primary Coverage Criteria
Intracranial stent placement in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms in circumstances other than noted above does not meet member benefit certificate primary coverage that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes.
For members with contracts without primary coverage criteria, intracranial stent placement in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms in circumstances other than noted above is considered investigational. Investigational services are specific contract exclusions in most member benefit certificates of coverage.
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (CPT 61630, 61635) for the treatment of acute stroke does not meet member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes.
For members with contracts without primary coverage criteria, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting in the treatment of acute stroke are considered investigational. Investigational services are specific contract exclusions in most member benefit certificates of coverage.
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for intracranial artery stenosis other than vertebral artery as indicated above does not meet member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes. This treatment is currently being studied in a clinical trial.
For members with contracts without primary coverage criteria, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for intracranial artery stenosis other than vertebral artery as indicated above is considered investigational. Investigational services are specific contract exclusions in most member benefit certificates of coverage.
The use of endovascular mechanical embolectomy for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke in circumstances other than noted above does not meet member benefit certificate primary coverage that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes.
For members with contracts without primary coverage criteria, the use of endovascular mechanical embolectomy for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke in circumstances other than noted above is considered investigational. Investigational services are specific contract exclusions in most member benefit certificates of coverage.
EFFECTIVE PRIOR TO DECEMBER 2016
Meets Primary Coverage Criteria Or Is Covered For Contracts Without Primary Coverage Criteria
Intracranial stent placement meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes as part of the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms for patients when surgical treatment is not appropriate and standard endovascular techniques do not allow for complete isolation of the aneurysm, e.g., wide-neck aneurysm (4 mm or more) or sack-to-neck ratio less than 2:1.
Intracranial flow diverting stents with FDA approval (e.g.,Pipeline Embolization Device) for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria as part of the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms that are not amenable to surgical treatment or standard endovascular therapy provided the aneurysm is:
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting of intracranial and extracranial vertebral artery stenosis meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in patients meeting the following criteria:
Percutaneous transluminal intracerebral angioplasty/endovascular balloon dilatation of cerebral arteries for the treatment of vasospasm meets member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes.
Does Not Meet Primary Coverage Criteria Or Is Investigational For Contracts Without Primary Coverage Criteria
Intracranial stent placement in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms in circumstances other than noted above does not meet member benefit certificate primary coverage that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes.
For members with contracts without primary coverage criteria, intracranial stent placement in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms in circumstances other than noted above is considered investigational. Investigational services are specific contract exclusions in most member benefit certificates of coverage.
Endovascular interventions (mechanical embolectomy-thrombectomy, angioplasty, stenting) in the treatment of acute stroke do not meet member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes.
For members with contracts without primary coverage criteria, endovascular interventions (mechanical embolectomy-thrombectomy, angioplasty, stenting) in the treatment of acute stroke are considered investigational. Investigational services are specific contract exclusions in most member benefit certificates of coverage.
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for intracranial artery stenosis other than vertebral artery as indicated above does not meet member benefit certificate primary coverage criteria that there be scientific evidence of effectiveness in improving health outcomes. This treatment is currently being studied in a clinical trial.
For members with contracts without primary coverage criteria, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for intracranial artery stenosis other than vertebral artery as indicated above is considered investigational. Investigational services are specific contract exclusions in most member benefit certificates of coverage.
|
|
|
|
| Rationale: |
Due to the detail of the rationale, the complete document is not online. If you would like a hardcopy print, please email: codespecificinquiry@arkbluecross.com
2015 Update
A literature search conducted through December 2014 did not reveal any new information that would prompt a change in the coverage statement. The key identified literature is summarized below.
Assessment of efficacy for therapeutic intervention involves a determination of whether the intervention improves health outcomes. The optimal study design for this purpose is a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that includes clinically relevant measures of health outcomes. Intermediate outcome measures, also known as surrogate outcome measures, may also be adequate if there is an established link between the intermediate outcome and true health outcomes. Nonrandomized comparative studies and uncontrolled studies can sometimes provide useful information on health outcomes, but are prone to biases such as noncomparability of treatment groups, placebo effect, and variable natural history of the condition.
RCTs Comparing Endovascular Therapies With Non-Interventional Care
From 2012 to 2014, results from 4 large RCTs comparing endovascular therapies with standard of care for acute ischemic stroke were published.
In 2014, Berkhermer et al reported initial results of the MR CLEAN trial (Multicenter Randomized Clinical trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands), an open-label, blinded end-point RCT with 500 subjects conducted at 16 centers in the Netherlands (Berkhemer, 2014). Eligible patients had acute ischemic stroke caused by an intracranial occlusion of the distal intracranial carotid artery, middle cerebral artery (M1 or M2), or anterior cerebral artery (A1 or A2), and a score of 2 or higher on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). Initiation of intra-arterial treatment had to be possible within 6 hours of stroke onset. Patients were randomly assigned to standard stroke treatment (N=267; 53.4%) or intra-arterial treatment (N=233; 46.6%). Most patients in both groups (87.1% in the intervention group and 90.6% in the control group) received IV alteplase, at a median of 85 and 87 minutes after stroke onset, respectively. Patients in the intra-arterial group underwent arterial catheterization with a microcatheter to the level of the occlusion. Specific treatment options included delivery of a thrombolytic agent, mechanical thrombectomy, or both, at the discretion of the local interventionist. Intra-arterial thrombolytic agents were either alteplase or urokinase; mechanical treatment could involve thrombus retraction, aspiration, wire disruption, or use of a retrievable stent. Analysis was intention-to-treat. One control group patient received intra-arterial treatment, and 17 patients (7.3%) in the intervention group did not receive intra-arterial therapy, most commonly (N=8) due to clinical improvement before the start of the intervention. Among the 233 patients randomized to intra-arterial therapy, 195 (83.7%) received mechanical therapies, with retrievable stents used in 190 patients (81.5%) and other devices in 5 patients (2.1%). Twenty-four patients (10.3%) received additional intra-arterial thrombolytic agents. No intra-arterial intervention was performed following catheterization in 20 subjects because of intracranial artery stenosis, occlusion, tortuosity, or dissection (N=10), no clot or targetable clot visible for intra-arterial therapy (N=8), or other technical problems (N=2).
For the study’s primary outcome (modified Rankin scale score at 90 days), the median score was 3 (IQR 2-5) among intervention subjects, compared with a median score of 4 (IQR 3-5) among control subjects, with an unadjusted common odds ratio (OR) of 1.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21 to 2.28; favors intervention). Twenty-seven (11.6%) intervention subjects had a modified Rankin score of 0 or 1 at 90 days, compared with 16 (6.0%) control subjects (unadjusted OR 2.06; 95% CI 1.08 to 3.92). Follow-up computed tomography (CT) angiography was available for 187 control subjects, of whom 141 had no intracranial occlusion (75.4%), compared with 68/207 (32.9%) of control subjects with follow-up CT angiography available (unadjusted OR 6.27; 95% CI 4.03 to 9.74). The thirty-day mortality rate was 18.9% in the intervention group, compared with 18.4% in the control group (p=NS). Rates of serious adverse events during the 90-day follow up period did not differ significantly between groups (P=0.31)., Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage occurred in 7.7% of intervention subjects compared with 6.4% of control subjects, which was not a significant difference. However, intervention subjects were more likely to demonstrate a new ischemic stroke in different vascular territory (5.6% vs 0.4%; P<0.001).
In 2014, Tomsick et al published a subgroup analysis of the IMS-III trial focusing on subjects with intracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) or M1 occlusion (Tomsick, 2014). This analysis included 200 subjects, 65 with intracranial ICA and 135 with M1 segments as the target vessel for revascularization. Of these, at angiography, 82% had an arterial occlusive lesion (AOL) score of 2-3 and 76% had a modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) score of 2-3 (partial or full perfusion) after IV-tPA, which may have limited the potential benefit for device-related revascularization. Ninety-day Rankin scale scores were higher with higher mTICI scores: of 32 subjects with an mTICI score of 0, 3.1% had a modified Rankin scale score of 0-2 at 90 days, compared with 12.5%, 19.4%, 46.3%, and 80% for subjects with mTICI scores of 1 (total N=16), 2a (total N=67), 2b (total N=80) and 3 (N=5), respectively. To account for potential bias in the choice of endovascular therapy, propensity score analysis was used to compare subjects with different endovascular therapy modalities for the primary study outcomes. After propensity score adjustment, the authors found no clear differences in clinical or revascularization outcomes across revascularization methods, which included standard microcatheter thrombolysis (N=51), the Ekos catheter (N=14), the Merci retriever (N=77), the Penumbra device (N=39), the Solitaire device (N=4), and other methods (N=15).
In another IMS-III subgroup analysis, Demchuck et al evaluated the association between baseline CT or magnetic resonance (MR) angiography findings and outcomes among 306 (47% of 656) who had baseline CT or MR angiographic imaging available (Demchuk, 2014). Ninety-two percent of those with angiography available had arterial occlusions demonstrated, 220 of which were proximal occlusions. Endovascular therapy group subjects with proximal occlusions had higher 24-hour recanalization rates than those with IV tPA only (84.3% of endovascular therapy subjects vs 56% of controls; P<0.001). However, no difference in the primary outcome, 90-day modified Rankin scale score of 0-2, was seen with proximal occlusions between groups (41.3% of endovascular therapy subjects vs 38% of controls; relative risk [RR] 1.07 [99% CI 0.67 to 1.70]).
Strengths of these 4 trials evaluating endovascular treatments for acute stroke include their randomized design and multisite recruitment. A potential strength was that, in general, the endovascular intervention was left to the discretion of the treating physician, which could allow for greater generalizability; on the other hand, the variability in specific endovascular treatments used may make it difficult to draw conclusions about the efficacy of mechanical embolectomy. In the IMS III and SYNTHESIS Expansion trials, sizable proportions of the endovascular therapy groups did not receive an endovascular device: in IMS III, 138 of 334 of those who received endovascular therapy received intra-arterial tPA only (Broderick, 2013); in SYNTEHSIS Expansion 109 of 165 of those who received endovascular therapy received intra-arterial tPA with clot fragmentation with a guidewire but without device deployment (Ciccone, 2013). In contrast, in the most recently-published trial, MR CLEAN, most intervention-group subjects (83.7%) received an endovascular mechanical therapy. In addition, the 3 trials published in 2013 (Broderick et al, Kidwell et al, and Ciccone et al) all had relatively low utilization of the newer generation retrievable stents (Solitaire FR and Trevo devices), which may be relevant as several studies have demonstrated superiority of the newer generation retrievable stents compared with older neuroendovascular devices. Again, the Berkhemer et al (MR CLEAN) study differed in that a high proportion of intervention subjects received a retrievable stent (81.5%). For the IMS III trial, there was a longer time to endovascular procedure than in early trials of endovascular interventions; given evidence that longer time to reperfusion is associated with poorer outcomes, the delay in revascularization in the endovascular group may have contributed to worse clinical outcomes in that group. In contrast with IMS III and the Ciccone et al study, MR CLEAN required a radiologically proven intracranial occlusion for study eligibility.
RCTs Comparing Different Endovascular Therapies
Assessment evaluated endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke in adults.19 The Assessment identified 5 multicenter RCTs meeting selection criteria, 3 of which compared endovascular treatment with standard stroke care (Broderick et al12, Ciccone et al (Ciccone, 2013), and Kidwell et al (Kidwell, 2013), and 2 of which newer and older endovascular treatments (Saver et al) (Saver, 2012) and Nogueira et al (Nogueira, 2012).The Assessment made the overall observations and conclusions:
Urra et al conducted a prospective comparative study comparing endovascular therapy with IV thrombolysis alone in patients presenting with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion and mild symptoms (NIHSS score ≤ 5) (Urra, 2014). The study included 78 patients, 34 treated with endovascular therapy and 44 treated medically. Compared with medical therapy alone, endovascular therapy was associated with higher rates of successful revascularization (91.2% vs 63.4%; P=0.006), but also higher rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (11.8% vs 0%; P=0.033). After adjusting for covariates, endovascular therapy was not significantly associated with modified Rankin scale score at 3 months.
Song et al compared treatment with stent-retriever devices and intra-arterial thrombolysis among 105 patients with acute ischemic stroke treated at a single institution (Song, 2014). Fifty-five patients were treated with the Solitaire stent-retriever device, while 50 patients were treated with intra-arterial thrombolysis with urokinase. After adjusting for occlusion site and rescue treatment, treatment with the stent-retriever was associated with successful reperfusion (82.0% vs 47.3%; adjusted OR 5.21; 95% CI 1.92 to 13.14) and likelihood of a favorable clinical outcome at 3 months (54.05 vs 43.6%; OR 3.40; 95% CI 1.31 to 8.84). Rates of mortality and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage did not differ significantly between groups.
Liebeskind et al conducted a pooled analysis of MERCI and Multi MERCI subjects to assess whether lesion configuration (I, L, or T clots and functional lesions based on collateral flow patterns) was associated with clinical outcomes in ICA strokes treated with mechanical thrombectomy (Liebeskind, 2014). Seventy-two patients were included in the analysis, 32.6%, 31.9%, and 8.3% of whom received IV tPA, intra-arterial tPA, and other endovascular devices in addition to the MERCI, respectively. The presence of a functional T lesion, with insufficient collateral flow to ipsilateral anterior cerebral arteries, was associated with successful revascularization (TIMI grade 2-3; adjusted OR 0.25; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.69; P=0.007) and 90-day good clinical outcomes (adjusted OR 0.08; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.69; P=0.021).
Nonrandomized, Comparative Studies Evaluating Specific Endovascular Intervention(s)
Some nonrandomized comparative studies have compared the outcomes of different types of endovascular interventions.
Kappelhof et al published results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing outcomes for mechanical therapy and intra-arterial thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke due to ICA occlusion, with separate results reported for intracranial and extracranial occlusions (Kappelhof, 2015). The overall review included 32 studies, 6 of which (N=95) reported outcomes for intracranial occlusion treated by intra-arterial thrombolysis and 8 of which (N=115) reported outcomes for intracranial occlusion treated by mechanical thrombectomy. None of the recently-published RCTs of endovascular therapy were included in the review, which included studies published through July 2013 and specifically reporting outcomes for ICA occlusions. In the subset of studies reporting on intracranial occlusions, overall outcome rates were 55% recanalization, 12% symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, 34% mortality, and 25% favorable outcome. Compared with intra-arterial fibrinolysis, mechanical thrombectomy was associated with a higher recanalization rate (69% vs 38%; P<0.001), a higher rate of favorable outcomes (34% vs 14%; P<0.001), with nonsignificantly different rates of death (29% vs 40%; P=0.085) and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (12.2% vs 11.7%; P=0.085).
For example, Turk et al conducted a retrospective, single-center review to compare clinical and cost-related outcomes for 3 endovascular interventions for acute stroke: the Penumbra system, stent retriever with local aspiration, and a “Direct Aspiration First Pass Technique” (ADAPT), which involves direct aspiration with a large bore catheter (Turk, 2014). Two hundred twenty-two patients underwent endovascular therapies for acute stroke during the study time period, 128 (58%) with the Penumbra system, 30 (13%) underwent with a stent retriever, and 64 (29%) underwent ADAPT. Recanalization rates (TICI 2b/3) were higher in the ADAPT group compared with the Penumbra group (95% vs 73%; P=0.0027), but no significant differences were seen across groups in 90-day modified Rankin scale scores.
Single-arm Studies Evaluating Endovascular Intervention in Basilar Artery Occlusion
In 2013, a number of several studies have reported noncomparative evaluations of endovascular therapies for acute basilar artery occlusion. Son et al reported outcomes for 31 subjects with acute basilar artery occlusion treated with mechanical thrombectomy with the Solitaire stent (N=13) or manual aspiration thrombectomy using the Penumbra reperfusion catheter (N=18) at a single center (son, 2014). Successful recanalization (TICI score ≥2b) did not differ between devices: 84.6% with the Solitaire stent compared with 100% with the Penumbra catheter (P=0.168); similarly, 3-month modified Rankin scale scores did not differ between the groups (3.6 with the Solitaire stent vs 3.2 with the Penumbra catheter; P=0.726).
The strongest evidence on the efficacy of endovascular mechanical embolectomy for acute ischemic stroke comes from 4 large RCTs published from 2013 to 2014. Three of these failed to demonstrate significant benefits from the use of endovascular mechanical embolectomy compared with usual therapy. These RCTs have some limitations, particularly related to relatively low use of embolectomy devices in general and of newer stent-retriever devices in particular, in their mechanical embolectomy groups. The most recently-published trial, MR CLEAN, addresses some of the limitations of the earlier trials, with a high proportion of intervention subjects receiving newer-generation stent-retriever devices and with inclusion criteria that required the presence of a proximal arterial occlusion. With the MR CLEAN results, there is now some RCT evidence that endovascular mechanical thrombectomy may improve outcomes of acute ischemic stroke. Results of additional ongoing randomized controlled trials of mechanical embolectomy will be needed to support or refute the MR CLEAN results. Based on the currently-available body of evidence, mechanical embolectomy for acute ischemic stroke is considered investigational. There is ongoing interest in the efficacy of stent-retriever devices in acute stroke and of endovascular interventions for basilar artery occlusion, which has a poor prognosis without treatment.
Endovascular Interventions for Symptomatic Intracranial Atherosclerotic Disease
Evidence about the role of endovascular stenting for treatment of symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic disease consists of at least 2 RCTs, a number of nonrandomized comparative studies, and numerous single-arm series. The most clinically relevant RCTs, nonrandomized comparative studies, and systematic reviews are reviewed next. Since the publication of the RCT evidence, there continue to be single arm publications (i.e., with all subjects receiving endovascular stents) describing various aspects of stenting for intracranial stenosis, including utilization trends, (Tanweer, 2014), predictors of outcomes based on symptomatology, (Alexander, 2014), predictors of outcomes based on lesion morphology and arterial access (Miao, 2014) and clinical outcomes with the Wingspan system (Yu, 2014).
In 2013, Qureshi et al published results from another small RCT comparing angioplasty alone with angioplasty with a balloon-expanding stent among 18 subjects with moderate intracranial stenosis (stenosis ≥ 50%) with documented failure of medical treatment or severe stenosis (≥70%) with or without failure of medical treatment (Qureshi, 2013). Technical success (<30% residual stenosis on immediate post-procedure angiography) occurred in 5/10 patients treated with angiography (9 randomized to angiography and 1 crossover from group randomized to stent placement) and 5/8 patients treated with stent placement. Rates of stroke or death were low in both groups: 1/10 in the angiography group and 0/8 in the stent placement group. This study suggests that angioplasty with stenting is feasible in patients with severe intracranial stenosis, but the small size and lack of statistical comparisons limit conclusions that can be drawn.
In 2014, Abuzinadah conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting the rates of stroke recurrence or death (the primary outcome) in symptomatic intracranial vertebrobasilar stenosis with medical or endovascular treatment (Abuzinadah, 2014). The authors identified 23 studies involving 592 medical treatment patients and 480 endovascular treatment patients. In pooled analysis, the stroke or death rate was 14.8 per 100 person-years (95% CI 9.5 to 20.1) in the medical therapy group and 8.9 per 100 person-years (95% CI 6.9 to 11.0) in the endovascular group (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.3; 95% CI 1.0 to 1.7). The stroke recurrence rate was 9.6 per 100 person-years (95% CI 5.1 to 14.1) in the medical group and 7.2 per 100 person-years (95% CI 5.5 to 9) in the endovascular group (IRR 1.1; 95% CI 0.8 to 1.5).
Stent-Assisted Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms
Self-Expanding Stents
Three self-expanding stents, the Neuroform Microdelivery Stent System, the Enterprise Vascular Reconstruction Device and Delivery System, and the Low-Profile Visualized Intraluminal Support Device, have FDA approval through the HDE program for the endovascular treatment intracranial aneurysms. The literature search did not identify any randomized trials of self-expanding stent-assisted treatment of intracranial aneurysms compared with standard neurosurgical treatment, ie, surgical clipping or endovascular coils. The available evidence consists of single-arm case series, registry studies, nonrandomized comparative studies, and one systematic review of nonrandomized comparative studies
Systematic Reviews
In 2014, Hong et al reported results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that compared stent-assisted coiling with coiling alone for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms (Hong, 2014). The authors included 10 retrospective cohort studies, ranging in size from 9 to 1109 patients. In pooled analysis, compared with coiling alone, stent-assisted coiling was associated with higher rates of progressive thrombosis (37.5% vs 19.4%; OR 2.75; 95% Ci 1.95 to 3.86; P<0.00001) and lower rates of recurrence (16.2% vs 34.4%; OR 0.35; 95% Ci 0.25 to 0.49; P<0.00001). Mortality was 9.1% for stent-assisted coiling, compared with 2.6% for coiling alone, although the difference was not statistically significant (OR 2.31; 95% CI 0.68 to 7.82; P=0.18). Similarly, permanent complication rates and thromboembolic complication rates were not significantly different between the two groups.
Hetts et al compared outcomes for patients treated with stent-assisted coiling with those treated with coiling alone for patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms enrolled in the prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter Matrix and Platinum Science (MAPS) Trial, which was designed to compare bare-metal aneurysm coils and polymer-coated aneurysm coils (Hetts, 2014). One-hundred thirty-seven patients were included who received a stent-assisted coil, along with 224 patients treated with coiling alone. Patients treated with stent-assisted coiling more often had wide-neck aneurysms (62% vs 33%; P<0.0001) and had aneurysms with lower dome-to-neck ratio (1.3 vs 1.8; P<0.0001). Periprocedural serious adverse events occurred in 6.6% of those treated with stent-assisted-coiling, compared with 4.5% of those treated with coiling alone (P=0.039). At 1 year, ischemic strokes were more common in patients who received a stent-assisted coil than in patients who received a coil alone (8.8% vs 2.2%; P=0.005). However, in multivariable analysis, stent use did not independently predict ischemic stroke at 2 years (adjusted OR 1.1; P=0.94).
Liu et al compared outcomes for patients with posterior communicating artery aneurysms treated with stent-assisted coiling with those treated with coiling alone in a retrospective comparative study (Liu, 2014). A total of 291 coiling procedures were performed, including 56 aneurysms treated with a self-expandable stent. Complete aneurysm occlusion on initial angiography occurred in 41.1% of stent-assisted coiling patients compared with 35.3% of non-stented patients (statistical comparison not reported). At last follow up (mean 14.3 months for stent-assisted coiling and 13.2 months for non-stent patients), aneurysms recurred in 10.6% of stent-assisted coiling patients compared with 28.1% of non-stent patients (P=0.014). Procedural complications occurred in 10.7% of stent-assisted coiling patients compared with 11.5% of non-stent patients (stated to be nonsignificantly different).
In 2014, van Rooij et al reported outcomes for 550 consecutive patients treated with endovascular methods for intracranial aneurysms at a single European center from 2009 to 2013 (van Rooij, 2014). Endovascular treatments consisted of selective coiling in 445 (80.8%), stent-assisted coiling in 68 (12.4%), balloon-assisted coiling in 13 (2.4%), parent vessel occlusion in 12 (2.2%) and flow diverter treatment in 12 (2.2%). Among the 11 patients treated with flow divertors, 2 patients had ruptured dissecting aneurysms, 2 deaths occurred, 1 patient had permanent morbidity, and 2 aneurysms were not occluded at 30 months follow-up. Direct comparisons with outcomes from alternative treatments are not reported.
Kallmes, et al, published 2 meta-analyses (Kallmes, 2014) identifying 793 patients with 906 aneurysms, 311 were in the anterior ICA circulation and at least 10 mm, 349 of which were in the anterior circulation and less than 10 mm, 59 of which were in the posterior circulation, 179 of which were in a non-ICA anterior circulation location and less than 10 mm, and 10 of which had no aneurysm size specified. Overall neurologic morbidity and mortality was 8.4%, highest in the posterior circulation group and lowest in the ICA, less than 10 mm group (16.4% vs 4.8%; P=0.01. The overall spontaneous rupture rate was 0.6%, and the intracranial hemorrhage rate was 2.4%. Ischemic stroke rates were 4.7%, again highest in the posterior circulation group and lowest in the ICA, less than 10 mm group (7.3% vs 2.7%; P=0.16). Several additional a number of noncomparative studies evaluating flow-diverting stents in the treatment of aneurysms have been published. The largest cohort study identified was by Kallmes et al, who conducted a retrospective analysis of patients treated with the Pipeline device at 17 centers worldwide.
Ongoing and Unpublished Clinical Trials
Endovascular Interventions for Acute Ischemic Stroke
A query of the online site database ClinicalTrials.gov in December 2014 identified a large number of studies are evaluating endovascular intracranial interventions for acute stroke. The following are RCTs that are evaluations of endovascular interventions compared with alternative treatment for acute stroke:
Endovascular Interventions for Symptomatic Intracranial Atherosclerotic Disease
A query of the online site database ClinicalTrials.gov in December 2014 identified a large number of studies are evaluating endovascular intracranial interventions for atherosclerotic disease or aneurysms The following are RCTs that are evaluations of endovascular interventions compared with alternative treatment for symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic disease:
Phase III Study of Pharos Vitesse Neurovascular Stent System Compared to Best Medical Therapy for the Treatment of Ischemic Disease (NCT00816166). This study randomly assigns patients with TIA or stroke attributable to a neurovascular stenosis (70%-99%) within the prior 30 days to an experimental group (PHAROS neurovascular stent placement with medical therapy) or a control group (medical therapy). The primary effectiveness end point is stroke or TIA in the same territory as the presenting event within 12 months of enrollment. Enrollment is planned for 250 patients, and the estimated completion date is listed as June 2014, but study has been terminated.
2016 Update
A literature search conducted through October 2016 did not reveal any new information that would prompt a change in the coverage statement. The key identified literature is summarized below.
Endovascular Interventions for Anterior Circulation Acute Ischemic Strokes
The evidence review focuses on the available RCTs and other comparative studies.
Systematic Reviews
Multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs evaluating endovascular therapy for acute stroke have been published, with varying inclusion criteria. The most relevant of the systematic reviews include the results of a series of RCTs published from 2014 to 2015 comparing endovascular therapies with standard care; these are the focus of this review. Some systematic reviews have focused only on mechanical embolectomy, while others have evaluated endovascular therapies more broadly.
In 2015, Badhiwala and colleagues reported results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs evaluating mechanical embolectomy after acute ischemic stroke (Badhiwala, 2015). Eligible studies were RCTs comparing endovascular therapy with standard care, including the use of intravenous tPA, in adult participants with acute stroke. Eight trials were included (Ciccone, 2013; Kidwell, 2013; Broderick, 2013; Berkhemer, 2014; Goyal, 2015; Campbell, 2015; Saver, 2012; and Jovin, 2015), with a total of 2423 patients. (These specific RCTs are described individually below). Studies were assessed as having low risk of bias overall with the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool. In a meta-analysis, the use of endovascular intervention lead to lead to proportional treatment benefit across modified Rankin scale (mRS) scores (odds ratio [OR], 1.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14 to 2.13; p=0.005). Patients treated with endovascular intervention were more likely than standard care patients to have functional independence at 90 days (44.6% for endovascular treatment [95% CI, 36.6% to 52.8%]; 31.8% for standard treatment [95% CI, 24.6% to 40.0%]), with an associated absolute risk difference of 12.0% (95% CI, 3.8% to 20.3%; odds ratio [OR], 1.71; 95% CI, 1.18 to 2.49; p=0.005). However, there was significant heterogeneity (I2=75.4%) in the analysis of functional improvement outcomes. The authors conducted a number of sensitivity analyses around predictors of functional outcomes, and found that the following factors were associated with functional outcomes:
There were no significant differences between endovascular intervention group and standard care group patients in rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage or death at 90 days.
In a meta-analysis including the same 8 trials included in the Badhiwala and colleagues study, Chen and colleagues (Chen, 2015) reported a similar odds ratio for 90 day functional independence as Badhiwala.
Hong and colleagues conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing endovascular recanalization therapy with standard care in acute ischemic stroke (Hong, 2015). This analysis included 15 RCTs with a total of 2,899 patients, 1575 randomized to endovascular recanalization arms and 1324 to control arms. In addition to the 8 trials which compared mechanical embolectomy with standard care (Ciccone, 2013; Kidwell, 2013; Broderick, 2013; Berkhemer, 2014; Goyal, 2015; Campbell, 2015; Saver, 2012; and Jovin, 2015),this review also included 2 trials evaluating intra-arterial pro-urokinase, 3 trials evaluating intra-arterial urokinase, 1 evaluating intra-arterial with intravenous tPA, and 1 evaluating intra-arterial tPA with mechanical thrombectomy. In a random-effects model including all trials, endovascular recanalization was associated with greater proportions of patients with mRS of 0-2 (43.3% vs 31.9%, OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.4, P<0.001). For safety outcomes, when all trials were included, rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH) were higher in endovascular recanalization arms, although the between group difference was not statistically significant (5.8% vs 4.6%, OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.69, P=0.345).
In another systematic review and meta-analysis, Kennedy and colleagues compared local mechanical and/or pharmacologic endovascular therapy, with or without intravenous thrombolysis, with standard-care control that included intravenous thrombolysis when appropriate.23 Eleven RCTs were included, the 8 trials comparing mechanical embolectomy with standard care (Ciccone, 2013; Kidwell, 2013; Broderick, 2013; Berkhemer, 2014; Goyal, 2015; Campbell, 2015; Saver, 2012; and Jovin, 2015), along with 2 trials comparing intra-arterial tPA with intravenous tPA alone, one of which was very small (n=7), and one evaluating intra-arterial tPA with mechanical thrombectomy. In a meta-analysis of all trials, patients in the local endovascular therapy groups had higher rates of functional independence than those treated with standard care (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.262 to 2.51, P<0.001). In subanalyses limited to trials that used imaging selection, that used stent-retriever devices in at least half of cases, or in which intravenous tPA was used in conjunction with endovascular therapy as appropriate, the use of local endovascular therapy remained significantly associated with higher rates of functional independence, with stronger effect sizes than in the overall analysis. However, in a subanalysis limited to trials in which endovascular arm patients did not receive intravenous tPA, there was no significant between-group difference in 90-day functional independence (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.597 to 3.54, P>0.05).
Given the disproportionate benefit associated with stent retriever use in subanalyses of RCTs, there has been some focus on the specific efficacy of stent retrievers for acute stroke.
Bush and colleagues conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs using predominantly stent retriever devices for acute stroke treatment (Bush, 2016). Trials that compared endovascular therapy with stent retrievers with medical management (defined as intravenous tPA unless it was contraindicated) were included. However, it is not specified how the authors defined a threshold to determine whether stent retrievers were “predominantly” used. The analysis included 5 trials (Berkhemer, 2014; Goyal, 2015; Campbell, 2015; Saver, 2012; and Jovin, 2015) with a total of 1287 patients. In pooled analysis for the review’s primary outcome, mRS at 90 days, patients randomized to endovascular therapy had an OR for more favorable mRS of 2.2 (95% CI, 1.66 to 2.98; p<0.001; I2=46.38%). Similar to the findings from the Badhiwala metaanalysis, there were no significant between-group differences in 90-day mortality rates or rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage.
Similarly, Grech and colleagues conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing stent retriever devices (trials in which second-generation thrombectomy devices comprised at least 80% of thrombectomy devices used) with intravenous thrombolysis in acute stroke.25 The systematic review included the same 5 trials as the Bush et al review (Berkhemer, 2014; Goyal, 2015; Campbell, 2015; Saver, 2012; and Jovin, 2015). In pooled analysis, the OR for functional independence at 90 days between thrombectomy and intravenous thrombolysis groups was 2.4 (46.1% for thrombectomy vs 26.5% for intravenous thrombolysis; 90% CI for OR: 1.89 to 3.05, P<0.001).
The results of the Bush et al and Grech et al systematic reviews were supported by a third systematic review of RCTs comparing stent retriever devices with standard care reported by Marmagkioli and colleagues (Marmagkiolis, 2015; Touma, 2016).
Zheng and colleagues conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing endovascular therapy with intravenous tPA, with analysis stratified by whether computed tomography angiography (CTA) was used to select patients for endovascular therapy (Zhen, 2015). The review included 7 RCTs with 2217 patients (Berkhemer, 2014; Broderick, 2013; Ciccone, 2013; Kidwell, 2013, Campbell, 2015; and Goyal, 2015), of which 4 used CTA to select patients. Endovascular therapy was associated with functional independence at 90 days in patients who underwent CTA-based selection (RR=1.75; 95% CI, 1.48 to 2.06; I2=0.05%), but not in patients who did not undergo CTA-based selection (RR=0.99; 05% CI, 0.85 to 1.14; I2=0.0%). All-cause mortality was not significantly associated with 90-day mortality, regardless of whether patients were selected with CTA.
A group of investigators have formed the Virtual International Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA)-Thrombectomy and Tissue Plasminogen Activator (TREAT) collaboration to develop protocols for patient level meta-analyses of pooled data from RCTs in which at least 85% of treated cases are treated with newer devices (direct aspiration catheters or stent retrievers) (Maclsaac, 2015).
Randomized Controlled Trials
RCTs Comparing Endovascular Therapies with Non-interventional Care
From 2012 to 2015, results from 8 large RCTs comparing endovascular therapies with standard of care for acute ischemic stroke were published. Five prospective, open-label, blinded end point (PROBE design) RCTs comparing endovascular therapy with standard care in the treatment of acute stroke were published from 2014 to 2015 and are the focus of this discussion. A high-level overview of the major RCTs follows, with a summary of results in Table 2. Subsequently in this section, the trials are described in more detail.
Although the RCTs report on a number of outcomes results pertaining to 3 specific outcomes are the focus here: the proportion of patients with 90-day modified Rankin scale (mRS) score of 0-2, short-term mortality rate, and rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). The primary goal of rapid revascularization in acute stroke is to reduce rates of significant disability; mRS scores of 0-2 correspond to functional independence, so represent a clinically useful measure of disability. Prior studies of endovascular therapy and thrombolytic therapy for acute stroke have been associated with increased risks of sICH, so this is another important safety-related outcome to evaluate.
There were 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 2423 patients (range, 70-656) which compared endovascular mechanical embolectomy with standard care for acute ischemic stroke. In two studies, the population and intervention delivered were not consistent with the target population and intervention; the remaining 6 studies with the populations and interventions of interest are the focus of this discussion. The most clinically-relevant and consistently reported finding was a comparison between treatment and control groups in the proportion of patients with a mRS score at 90 days of 0-2. Among the 6 studies reporting on the population and intervention of interest, all provide some information on the proportion of patients with 90-day mRS of 0-2. Across the studies, the absolute difference between treatment and control groups in proportion of patients with 90-day functional independence ranged from 1.55% to 25%. With one exception (MR Rescue [Kidwell et al]), all of the studies reported a statistically significant improvement in the proportion of patients with functional independence at 90 days, with odds ratios ranging from 1.7 to 3.8. Among the 6 studies reporting on the populations and interventions of interest, mortality rates and sICH rates did not differ significantly between study groups. It is not possible to draw conclusions about the safety or harm of the procedure from this finding; the lack of significant difference may be due to inadequate sample sizes.
RCTs Comparing Different Endovascular Therapies
Saposnik and colleagues evaluated the added benefit added by stent retrievers to intravenous tPA using pooled patient-level data from the SWIFT study (Saposnik, 2015) and the STAR trial, a prospective, single-arm trial of the solitaire device (Pereira, 2013), along with data from the NINDS tPA Stroke Study, a RCT evaluating intravenous tPA. Of 915 patients included in the pooled analysis, 312 were treated with placebo, 312 with intravenous tPA, 106 with stent retrievers alone, and 160 with intravenous tPA and stent retrievers. The authors used a shift analysis which used a proportional odds model to evaluate the association between treatment and each of the 7 mRS categories. The use of stent retrievers (alone or with tPA) was associated with a higher probability of functional Independence (mRS 0-2) at 90 days: 41% of those treated with tPA alone, 69.8% of those treated with stent retrievers, and 72.8% of those treated with stent retrievers and tPA had functional independence at 90 days.
Noncomparative Studies
Huo and colleagues reported outcomes for 36 consecutive patients with acute basilar artery occlusion treated with the Solitaire stent (Huo, 2015) Recanalization (TICI grade ≥ 2b) was successful in 94.4% of patients. However, mortality at 90 days was high (30.56%). Of note, 30 (83.3%) patients had stenosis in the occluded artery and 25 patients (69.4% of all patients in the series) also underwent angioplasty.
Systematic Reviews
In 2015, Ryu and colleagues conducted a systematic review of studies reporting complications after stent-assisted coiling of ruptured intracranial aneurysms, with a focus on the association of complications with anti-platelet therapy (Ryu, 2015).The review included 33 studies, 3 of which were prospective and the remaining 30 retrospective (total N=1090 patients). In pooled analysis, thromboembolic complications occurred in 108 patients (event rate, 11.2%; 95% CI, 9.2% to 13.6%). Intra-procedural hemorrhage occurred in 46 (event rate, 5.4%; 95% CI, 4.1% to 7.1%).
Nonrandomized Comparative Studies
Consoli and colleagues compared stent-assisted coiling with balloon-assisted coiling in patients with unruptured wide-necked intracranial aneurysms treated at a single center (Consoli, 2016). The study included 268 patients with 286 aneurysms, 117 (122 aneurysms) of whom were treated with stent-assisted coiling and 151 (164 aneurysms) of whom were treated with balloon-assisted coiling. At discharge, 97.9% and 97.3% of those in the balloon-assisted and stent-assisted groups, respectively, had mRS of 0-1 (statistical comparison not reported). After 6 months, 97.9% and 98% of those in the balloon-assisted and stent-assisted groups, respectively, had mRS of 0-1, while mortality rates were 2.6% and 1.7% in the balloon-assisted and stent assisted groups, respectively (statistical comparisons not reported). At 6 months, aneurysm recurrence rates were 11.1% and 5.8% in the balloon-assisted and stent-assisted groups, respectively. In multivariable analysis, the use of stent-assisted coiling was significantly associated with complete occlusion at the end of the procedure (regression coefficient not reported; p=0.024) and complete occlusion after 6 months (regression coefficient not reported; p=0.05).
Comparison between Endovascular Devices for Intracranial Aneurysms
Nonrandomized studies, which have been summarized in a systematic review by King and colleagues report comparisons between devices used for stent-assisted coiling of intracranial aneurysms.
King and colleagues reviewed published studies reporting on stent-assisted coiling with the Neuroform and Enterprise systems to compare outcomes between the devices (King, 2015).The analysis included 47 studies with a total of 4039 patients (4238 aneurysms; 2111 and 2127 treated with the Neuroform and Enterprise systems, respectively). Most studies were retrospective (81%). Compared with those treated with the Enterprise system, patients treated with the Neuroform system were more likely to have deployment failure (2.3% vs 0.2%, p<0.001), had a higher mortality rate (2.8% vs 1.8%, p=0.04), were less likely to have 100% aneurysm occlusion at last follow up (61.1% vs 74.7%,p<0.001), and were more likely to have recanalization (13.9% vs 10.6%, p=0.02). However, conclusions that can be drawn from these findings are limited by the potential for bias in the underlying studies and between-study heterogeneity.
Single-Arm Series
In another relatively large study, Lee et al reported on 1038 patients treated with endovascular coiling, 296 of whom underwent stent-assisted coiling, with a focus on predictors of procedural rupture.121 Three cases of procedural rupture occurred among patients treated with stent-assisted coiling.
Other representative non-comparative studies in which at least some patients are treated with devices commercially available in the United States are summarized in Table 2. Interpretation of these studies is limited by potential selection bias and no comparison group. In general, these series demonstrate high rates of technical success of stent deployment with high rates of aneurysm occlusion; however, variable complication rates, particularly related to thromboembolic events were observed.
Flow-Diverting Stents for Intracranial Aneurysms
Nonrandomized Comparative Studies
Zhou and colleagues reported results of a systematic review of studies comparing flow-diverting devices with endovascular coiling for intracranial aneurysms which included 9 retrospective comparative studies with a total of 863 subjects (Zhou, 2015). This review included studies with ruptured or unruptured aneurysms. Across the 9 studies, 305 patients were treated with flow-diverting devices, 558 with coil embolization therapy, and 324 with stent-assisted coiling alone. In pooled analysis, the use of flow diverting devices was associated with a significantly higher complete occlusion rate when compared with coil embolization therapy (OR 3.13, 95% CI 2.11 to 4.65, I2=18%) or with stent-assisted coiling (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.34 to 3.24, I2=0%). Rates of overall morbidity were not significantly different between flow diverting device- and coil embolization therapy-treated patients, or between flow diverting device- and stent-assisted coiling-treated patients.
Single-Arm Series
Multiple noncomparative studies have reported outcomes from flow-diverting stent-assisted treatment of intracranial aneurysms since the introduction of the Pipeline endovascular device. These studies have been summarized in several systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The largest systematic review identified (reported by Briganti and colleagues reviewed 18 studies published from 2009 to 2014 with 1483 patients (1704 aneurysms) (Briganti, 2015). Most (87.5%) treated aneurysms were in the anterior circulation and most (87.5%) were saccular in morphology. In the 17 studies reporting procedural complications, mean incidence was 8.3% (range, 0%-23.1%). Permanent morbidity occurred in a mean 3.5% of patients (range: 0%-15%), while the mean mortality rate was 3.4% (range, 0.5%-8%). Across the 18 studies, aneurysms were completely occluded in a mean 81.5% of cases (range, 69%-100%).
Guedon and colleagues reported on late ischemic complications after flow diverting stent placement (Guedon, 2016. Among 86 patients treated at a single institution, angiographic follow up was available to a mean 15.7 months ([SD=11.8 months; median, 13 months; range, 8-21 months) and clinical follow-up was available to a mean 16.9 months (SD=12.9 months; median, 14 months; range 10-22 months). Five (5.8%) patients developed ischemic complications.
2018 Update
A literature search conducted using the MEDLINE database through February 2018 did not reveal any new information that would prompt a change in the coverage statement. The following is a summary of the key identified literature.
DAWN Trial. Nogueira et al reported on results of the DAWN trial, a multicenter, Bayesian, adaptive, open-label RCT with blinded outcome assessment sponsored by Stryker Neurovascular (Nogueira, 2018). DAWN included patients who had last been known to be well 6 to 24 hours earlier and who had a mismatch between the severity of the clinical deficit and the infarct volume. DAWN was conducted at 26 sites in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Australia from September 2014 through February 2017. Patients were assigned to thrombectomy plus standard care (n=107) or standard care alone (n=99). Very few patients were treated with IV tPA because patients were generally enrolled after the accepted window of time in which IV tPA is administered. The adaptive trial was originally designed for a sample size ranging from 150 to 500 patients but was stopped early due to efficacy. The mean age was 70 years, and the median NIHSS score was 17. Approximately 55% of the patients had a “wake-up” stroke. The proportion of patients with functional independence (mRS score ≤2) at 90 days was 49% in the thrombectomy group and 13% in the standard care group (adjusted difference, 33%; 95% credible interval, 24% to 44%; posterior probability of superiority, >0.999). The proportion of patients with symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage at 24 hours was 6% in the thrombectomy group and 3% in the standard care group (p=0.50). The 90-day mortality rate was similar between groups (19% vs 18%, respectively; p=1.00).
Noguiera et al compared use of the Penumbra 3-D stent retriever and an aspiration-based mechanical thrombectomy device with the Penumbra aspiration system alone in 198 patients from 25 North American sites enrolled from May 2012 through November 2015 (Noguiera, 2018). Eligible patients had large vessel intracranial occlusion acute ischemic stroke with an NIHSS score of at least 8 within 8 hours of onset. The primary effectiveness outcome was the rate of a mTICI score of 2 to 3, with a 15% noninferiority margin. One hundred ninety patients were included in the primary analysis. Eighty-two (87%) of 94 patients in the 3-D stent retriever group had a mTICI score of 2 to 3 compared with 79 (82%) of 96 in the aspiration alone group (difference, 4.9%; 90% CI, -3.6% to 13.5%). The incidence of the device- and procedure-related serious adverse events within 24 hours of the procedure was 4 (4%) of 98 patients in the 3-D stent retriever group and 5 (5%) of 100 in the aspiration alone group.
No randomized trials evaluating intracranial aneurysms were identified comparing flow-diverting stent treatment with standard neurosurgical treatment (ie, surgical clipping or endovascular coils) from the time of FDA approval until 2017 (Raymond, 2017).
PRACTICE GUIDELINES AND POSITION STATEMENTS
American Heart Association and American Stroke Association
The American Heart Association and the American Stroke Association (2018) published joint guidelines on the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke (Powers, 2018). These guidelines included several recommendations relevant to the use of endovascular therapies for acute stroke.
2019 Update
Annual policy review completed with a literature search using the MEDLINE database through February 2019. No new literature was identified that would prompt a change in the coverage statement.
2020 Update
A literature search was conducted through February 2020. There was no new information identified that would prompt a change in the coverage statement. The key identified literature is summarized below.
American Heart Association and American Stroke Association
The American Heart Association and the American Stroke Association published joint guidelines on the early management of patients with acute ischemic stroke (AHA, 2018). These guidelines included several recommendations relevant to the use of endovascular therapies for acute stroke.
2021 Update
Annual policy review completed with a literature search using the MEDLINE database through February 2021. No new literature was identified that would prompt a change in the coverage statement. The key identified literature is summarized below.
Liu et al reported results of the Basilar Artery Occlusion Endovascular Intervention versus Standard Medical Treatment (BEST) multicenter, open-label, RCT with blinded outcome assessment conducted at 28 stroke centers in China comparing endovascular plus standard medical therapy (n=66) to standard medical therapy (n=65) for treatment of acute strokes due to vertebrobasilar artery occlusion (Liu, 2020). Patients had an acute ischemic stroke consistent with acute occlusion of the basilar artery presenting within 8 hours of vertebrobasilar occlusion and a prestroke score of 0–2 on the modified Rankin Scale. The primary outcome was a modified Rankin Scale score of 3 or lower (indicating ability to walk unassisted) at 90 days. Patients in both groups meeting criteria for intravenous thrombolysis received intravenous alteplase and received standard medical therapy following the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association guidelines. The trial was designed with a sample size of 344 patients but was terminated prematurely by the steering committee based on the recommendation of the data and safety monitoring board because of excessive crossovers and poor recruitment. In the intention-to-treat analysis, there was not a statistically significant difference in the proportion of participants with modified Rankin Scale 0–3 at 90 days (28 / 66 [42%] in the endovascular group vs 21 / 65 [32%] in the standard therapy group; adjusted odds ratio = 1.7, 95% CI, 0.8 to 3.7). The 90-day mortality rates were 33% vs 38% in the endovascular and standard therapy groups respectively (p=0.54).
Alexander et al 2019 reported results from the WEAVE (Wingspan Stent System Post Market Surveillance) post marketing surveillance study (Alexander, 2019). WEAVE was an FDA mandated, prospective, single-arm study evaluating the rate of stroke and death within 72 hours post stenting in patients who met the FDA on-label usage criteria. One hundred fifty-two consecutive patients were enrolled at 24 hospitals. The study was designed to enroll 389 patients but was stopped early when the when the second, predetermined interim data analysis indicated that the safety benchmarks were met. The primary outcome was stroke or death within 72 hours. The primary outcome included 2 nonfatal strokes and 2 deaths from strokes for a total of 4 patients (2.6%) with an event of stroke, bleed, or death.
Kiselev et al reported results of the Study of complex intracranial aneurysms treatment (SCAT) RCT of flow diversion versus parent vessel occlusion and bypass in patients with complex anterior circulation aneurysms conducted in 2 neurosurgical centers in Russia (Kiselev, 2018). One hundred and eleven patients were randomized; 55 into the flow diversion group and 56 into parent vessel occlusion with bypass group. There was a baseline imbalance with respect to age and aneurysm neck size so the authors included only 40 patients in each group who were selected after propensity score matching. Mean age was 54 years old and approximately three-quarters of the patients were women. Patients were followed for 12 months. The aneurysms were in the following segments: A2 segment of anterior cerebral artery (n=1), anterior communicating artery (n=3), cavernous carotid (n=29), ophthalmic segment of internal carotid artery (n=9), communicating segment of internal carotid artery (n=11), M1 segment (n=20) and M2 segment of middle cerebral artery (n=7). The median aneurysm size by MRI was 12 mm (interquartile range, 9 to 16.75) in bypass group and 15 mm (interquartile range, 9 to 20.5) in group of flow diversion. Outcome definitions were unclear. Of the 40 patients included in analysis, 97.5% in the flow diversion group and 80% in the bypass group had a 'good clinical outcome' (difference between groups, p=0.029). The overall morbidity and mortality rates were 15% and 5%, respectively but rates by group were not reported. The rate of complete occlusion at 12 months was 65% in the flow diversion group and 97.5% in bypass group (p=0.001).
2022 Update
Annual policy review completed with a literature search using the MEDLINE database through February 2022. No new literature was identified that would prompt a change in the coverage statement. The key identified literature is summarized below.
Campbell et al reported on results of the EXTEND-IA trial comparing endovascular therapy with tPA alone (Campbell, 20215). This trial enrolled patients with ischemic stroke who received IV tPA within 4.5 hours after stroke onset. Eligible patients had an occlusion of the internal carotid artery or M1 or M2 segments of the middle cerebral artery on computed tomography angiography and were able to receive endovascular therapy within 6 hours of stroke onset; further, the patients were functionally independent before the stroke. Patients were evaluated before enrollment with CT perfusion imaging and were required to have evidence of salvageable brain tissue and an ischemic core with a volume of less than 70 mL. Computed tomography perfusion imaging was analyzed with operator-independent postprocessing software. Enrollment was planned for 100 patients. The trial’s data safety and monitoring board reviewed data for the first 70 enrolled patients after the results of the MR CLEAN trial were published and stopped EXTEND-IA for efficacy based on prespecified criteria. The first 70 patients were randomized to IV tPA plus endovascular therapy using the Solitaire FR retrievable stent (n=35) or no further therapy (IV tPA-only; n=35). The trial used 2 coprimary endpoints: reperfusion (measured as the percentage reduction in perfusion-lesion volume between the initial imaging and imaging at 24 hours) and early neurologic improvement (defined as a reduction of ≥ 8 points on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale or a score of 0 or 1 at day 3).
In a post-hoc analysis of DAWN assessing the impact of periprocedural and technical factors and patient characteristics on revascularization and outcome, the authors found that patients requiring ≥3 thrombectomy passes with the Trevo stent retriever and those with a baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score >17 had a reduced chance of favorable outcome at 3 months (Tekle, 2020).
Cao et al completed a multicenter, prospective, open label RCT at 7 Chinese stroke centers that compared the efficacy and safety of the RECO self-expanding clot retriever to Solitaire FR in patients with acute intracranial large vessel occlusion (Cao, 2020). In the RECO Flow Restoration Device Versus Solitaire FR With the Intention for Thrombectomy (REDIRECT) study, patients with an acute ischemic stroke within 8 hours after symptom onset and a baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≥8 and ≤24 were randomly assigned to RECO (n=67) or Solitaire FR (n=69). The primary efficacy endpoint was a modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction reperfusion grade ≥2 within 3 passes. Results revealed that the treatment groups were similar with regard to the primary efficacy endpoint (91% RECO vs. 87% Solitaire FR; p=0.5861). No serious adverse device effects were observed, with symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage rates (1.5% vs. 7.2%; p=0.1027), and the rates of serious adverse events (6% vs. 1.4%; p=0.205) within 24 hours after the procedure were similar between the groups. No differences between the groups were seen regarding rate of functional independence (63% vs. 46%; p=0.0609), 90-day all-cause mortality (13% vs. 23%; p=0.1848), or procedure duration (p=0.5986).
Wang et al completed a Cochrane review that evaluated the efficacy and safety of endovascular therapy plus conventional medical treatment versus medical treatment alone for symptomatic intracranial artery stenosis (Wang, 2020). The review included 3 RCTs enrolling 632 patients. Results revealed that endovascular therapy probably resulted in an increased rate of 30 day death or stroke as compared to conventional medical therapy (risk ratio 3.07; 95% CI, 1.80 to 5.24; moderate quality evidence), 30 day ipsilateral stroke (risk ratio 3.54; 95% CI, 1.98 to 6.33; moderate quality evidence), 30 day ischemic stroke (risk ratio 2.52; 95% CI, 1.37 to 4.62; moderate quality evidence), and 30 day hemorrhagic stroke (risk ratio 15.53; 95% CI, 2.10 to 115.16; low quality evidence). Endovascular therapy was also likely associated with worse outcomes in these factors at 1 year. No significant differences between the groups were noted for 30 day or 1 year transient ischemic attack (TIA) and 30 day or 1 year death. The included trials had a high risk of bias due to early termination and the impossibility of blinding the endovascular intervention. Additionally, a high risk of attrition bias was seen in 1 trial as there was a high rate of loss of 1 year follow-up as well as a high proportion of patients that were transferred from endovascular to medical management.
|
|
|
|
| CPT/HCPCS: | |
|
|
|
| References: |
Meyers PM, Schumacher HC, Connolly ES, Jr. et al.(2011) Current status of endovascular stroke treatment. Circulation 2011; 123(22):2591-601. Rha JH, Saver JL.(2007) The impact of recanalization on ischemic stroke outcome: a meta-analysis. Stroke 2007; 38(3):967-73. Abelson M, Roos J.(2010) Mechanical embolectomy for large vessel ischemic strokes: A cardiologist's experience. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2010; 76(3):309-15. Abou-Chebl A.(2010) Endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke may be safely performed with no time window limit in appropriately selected patients. Stroke 2010; 41(9):1996-2000. Abruzzo T, Moran C, Blackham KA, et al.(2012) Invasive interventional management of post-hemorrhagic cerebral vasospasm in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Neurointerv Surg. May 2012;4(3):169-177. PMID 22374130 Abuzinadah AR, Alanazy MH, Almekhlafi MA, et al.(2014) Stroke recurrence rates among patients with symptomatic intracranial vertebrobasilar stenoses: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurointerv Surg. Dec 11 2014. PMID 25501448 Adams HP, delZoppo G, Alberts MJ et al.(2007) Guidelines for the early management of adults with ischemic stroke. Circulation 2007; 115(20):e478-534. Akins PT, Amar AP, Pakbaz RS et al.(2013) Complications of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Stroke in the SWIFT Trial with Solitaire and Merci Devices Complications of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Stroke in the SWIFT Trial with Solitaire and Merci Devices Alazzaz A, Thornton J, et al.(2000) Intracranial percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for arteriosclerotic stenosis. Arch Neurol, 2000; 57:1625-30. Alexander MD, Meyers PM, English JD, et al.(2014) Symptom differences and pretreatment asymptomatic interval affect outcomes of stenting for intracranial atherosclerotic disease. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Jun 2014;35(6):1157-1162. PMID 24676000 Alexander MJ, Zauner A, Chaloupka JC et al.(2019) WEAVE Trial: Final Results in 152 On-Label Patients. Stroke. 2019 Apr;50(4). PMID 31125298 Alexandrov AV, Schellinger PD, Saqqur M et al.(2011) Reperfusion and outcomes in Penumbra vs. systemic tissue plasminogen activator clinical trials. Int J Stroke 2011; 6(2):118-22. Almekhlafi MA, Menon BK, Freiheit EA et al.(2012) A meta-analysis of observational intra-arterial stroke therapy studies using the Merci device, Penumbra system, and retrievable stents. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012 [Epub ahead of print]. Arrese I, Sarabia R, Pintado R et al.(2013) Flow-diverter devices for intracranial aneurysms: systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurgery 2013; 73(2):193-9; discussion 99-200. Aydin K, Arat A, Sencer S, et al.(2015) Stent-Assisted Coiling of Wide-Neck Intracranial Aneurysms Using Low-Profile LEO Baby Stents: Initial and Midterm Results. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Oct 2015;36(10):1934-1941. PMID 26021624 Badhiwala JH, Nassiri F, Alhazzani W, et al.(2015) Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Metaanalysis. JAMA. Nov 3 2015;314(17):1832-1843. PMID 26529161 Baker WL, Colby JA, Tongbram V, et al.(2011) Neurothrombectomy devices for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke: state of the evidence. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:243-252. Becker KJ, Brott TG.(2005) Approval of the MERCI clot retriever: a critical view. Stroke 2005; 36(2):400-3. Becske T, Kallmes DF, Saatci I et al.(2013) Pipeline for uncoilable or failed aneurysms: results from a multicenter clinical trial. Radiology 2013; 267 (3):858-68. Behme D, Kowoll A, Mpotsaris A, et al.(2014) Multicenter clinical experience in over 125 patients with the Penumbra Separator 3D for mechanical thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke. J Neurointerv Surg. Nov 3 2014. PMID 25366355 Berkhemer OA, Fransen PS, Beumer D, et al.(2014) A Randomized Trial of Intraarterial Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke. N Engl J Med. Dec 17 2014. PMID 25517348 Bhatia R, Hill MD, Shobha N, et al.(2010) Low rates of acute recanalization with intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator in ischemic stroke: real-world experience and a call for action. Stroke. Oct 2010;41(10):2254-2258. PMID 20829513 Binning MJ, Adel JG, Maxwell CR, et al.(2014) Early postmarket experience after US Food and Drug Administration approval with the Trevo device for thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke. Neurosurgery. Nov 2014;75(5):584-589; discussion 589. PMID 25121793 Biondi A, Janardhan V, Katz JM et al.(2007) Neuroform stent-assisted coil embolization of wide-neck intracranial aneurysms: strategies in stent deployment and midterm follow-up. Neurosurgery 2007; 61(3):460-8. Bodily KD, Cloft HJ, Lanzino G et al.(2011) Stent-assisted coiling in acutely ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a qualitative, systematic review of the literature. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011; 32(7):1232-6. Bose A, Hartmann M, Henkes H et al.(2007) A novel, self-expanding, nitinol stent in medically refractory intracranial atherosclerotic stenoses: the Wingspan study. Stroke 2007; 38(5):1531-7. Bose A, Henkes H, Alfke K et al.(2008) The Penumbra System: a mechanical device for the treatment of acute stroke due to thromboembolism. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008; 29(7):1409-13. Bracard S, Ducrocq X, Mas JL, et al.(2016) Mechanical thrombectomy after intravenous alteplase versus alteplase alone after stroke (THRACE): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. Oct 2016;15(11):1138-1147. PMID 27567239 Brasiliense LB, Stanley MA, Grewal SS, et al.(2016) Silent ischemic events after Pipeline embolization device: a prospective evaluation with MR diffusion-weighted imaging. J Neurointerv Surg. Jan 8 2016. PMID 26747877 Briganti F, Leone G, Marseglia M, et al.(2015) Endovascular treatment of cerebral aneurysms using flow-diverter devices: A systematic review. Neuroradiol J. Aug 2015;28(4):365-375. PMID 26314872 Brinjikji W, Kallmes DF, Cloft HJ, et al.(2015) Age-related outcomes following intracranial aneurysm treatment with the Pipeline Embolization Device: a subgroup analysis of the IntrePED registry. J Neurosurg. Nov 6 2015:1-5. PMID 26544776 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 2013; 368(10):893-903. 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. Mar 7 2013;368(10):893-903. PMID 23390923 Broussalis E, Hitzl W, McCoy M et al.(2013) Comparison of endovascular treatment versus conservative medical treatment in patients with acute basilar artery occlusion. Vasc Endovascular Surg 2013; 47(6):429-37. Broussalis E, Trinka E, Hitzl W et al.(2012) Comparison of stent-retriever devices versus the Merci retriever for endovascular treatment of acute stroke. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013; 34(2):366-72. Broussalis E, Trinka E, Wallner A et al.(2013) Thrombectomy in Patients With Large Cerebral Artery Occlusion: A Single-Center Experience With a New Stent Retriever. Vasc Endovascular Surg 2013. Bush CK, Kurimella D, Cross LJ, et al.(2016) Endovascular Treatment with Stent-Retriever Devices for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. PLoS One. 2016;11(1):e0147287. PMID 26807742 Campbell BC, Mitchell PJ, Kleinig TJ, et al.(2015) Endovascular therapy for ischemic stroke with perfusion-imaging selection. N Engl J Med. Mar 12 2015;372(11):1009-1018. PMID 25671797 Cao J, Lin H, Lin M, et al.(2020) RECO Flow Restoration Device Versus Solitaire FR With the Intention for Thrombectomy Study (REDIRECT): a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Neurosurg. Jun 05 2020: 1-9. PMID 32502991 Castano C, Dorado L, Guerrero C et al.(2010) Mechanical thrombectomy with the Solitaire AB device in large artery occlusions of the anterior circulation: a pilot study. Stroke 2010; 41(8):1836-40. Chalouhi N, Jabbour P, Starke RM et al.(2013) Endovascular treatment of proximal and distal posterior inferior cerebellar artery aneurysms. J Neurosurg 2013; 118(5):991-9. Chalouhi N, Jabbour P, Starke RM, et al.(2013) Endovascular treatment of proximal and distal posterior inferior cerebellar artery aneurysms. J Neurosurg. May 2013;118(5):991-999. PMID 23350778 Chalouhi N, Tjoumakaris S, Starke RM et al.(2013) Comparison of flow diversion and coiling in large unruptured intracranial saccular aneurysms. Stroke 2013; 44(8):2150-4. Chastain HD 2nd, Campbell MS, et al.(1999) Extracranial vertebral artery stent placement: in-hospital and follow-up results. J Neurosurg, 1999; 91:547-52. Cheang MY, Manning N, Churilov L et al.(2013) Recanalisation success is associated with good clinical outcome despite advanced age and stroke severity in patients treated with the Solitaire stentriever. J Clin Neurosci 2013. Chen CJ, Ding D, Starke RM, et al.(2015) Endovascular vs medical management of acute ischemic stroke. Neurology. Dec 1 2015;85(22):1980-1990. PMID 26537058 Chen Z, Yang Y, Miao H et al.(2013) Endovascular treatment for large and giant fusiform aneurysms of the vertebrobasilar arteries. Clin Imaging 2013; 37(2):227-31. Chimowitz MI, Lynn MJ, Derdeyn CP et al.(2011) Stenting versus aggressive medical therapy for intracranial arterial stenosis. N Engl J Med 2011; 365(11):993-1003. Chimowitz MI, Lynn MJ, Howlett-Smith H, et al(2005) Comparison of warfarin and aspirin for symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis. N Engl J Med. Mar 31 2005;352(13):1305-1316. PMID 15800226 Ciccone A, Valvassori L, Nichelatti M, et al.(2013) Endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. Mar 7 2013;368(10):904-913. PMID 23387822 Ciccone A, Valvassori L, Ponzio M et al.(2010) Intra-arterial or intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke? The SYNTHESIS pilot trial. J Neurointerv Surg 2010; 2(1):74-9. Ciccone A., Valvassori L, Nichelatti M, et al.(2013) Endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2013 Feb 6, [epub ahead of print]. Cohen JE, Rabinstein AA, Ramirez-de-Noriega F et al.(2013) Excellent rates of recanalization and good functional outcome after stent-based thrombectomy for acute middle cerebral artery occlusion. Is it time for a paradigm shift? J Clin Neurosci 2013; 20(9):1219-23. Colby GP, Paul AR, Radvany MG et al.(2012) A single center comparison of coiling versus stent assisted coiling in 90 consecutive paraophthalmic region aneurysms. J Neurointerv Surg 2012; 4(2):116-20. Concentric Retriever Devce (CRD) in Acute Ischemic Stroke. (NCT00203710). www.clinicaltrial.gov. Last accessed February 15, 2011. Consoli A, Vignoli C, Renieri L, et al.(2016) Assisted coiling of saccular wide-necked unruptured intracranial aneurysms: stent versus balloon. J Neurointerv Surg. Jan 2016;8(1):52-57. PMID 25428449 Coward LJ, Featherston RL, Brown MM.(2005) Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for vertebral artery stenosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2005; Issue 2:Art.No. CD000516.pub2. Coward LJ, McCabe DJ, et al.(2007) Long-term outcome after angioplasty and stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis compared with medical treatment in the Carotid and Vertebral Artery Transluminal Angioplasty Study (CAVATAS): a randomized trial. Stroke, 2007; 38:1526-30. Cruz-Flores S, Diamond AL.(2006) Angioplasty for intracranial artery stenosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2006; Issue 3. Art No CD004133.pub2. Dabus G, Gerstie RJ, et al.(2006) Endovascular treatment of the vertebral artery origin in patients with symptoms of vertebrobasilar ischemia. Neuroradiol, 2006 [Epub ahead of print]. de Havenon A, Sheth K, Johnston KC, et al.(2021) Acute Ischemic Stroke Interventions in the United States and Racial, Socioeconomic, and Geographic Disparities. Neurology. Dec 07 2021; 97(23): e2292-e2303. PMID 34649872 Decision memo for intracranial stenting and angioplasty (CAG-00085R2). www.cms.hhs.gov accessed 11/6/06. Decision Memo for Intracranial Stenting and Angioplasty (CAG-00085R5) , Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Available online at: http://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/nca-proposed-decision-memo.aspx?NCAId=214&fromdb=true. Last accessed April 2012. Demchuk AM, Goyal M, Yeatts SD, et al.(2014) Recanalization and clinical outcome of occlusion sites at baseline CT angiography in the Interventional Management of Stroke III trial. Radiology. Oct 2014;273(1):202-210. PMID 24895878 Derdeyn CP, Chimowitz MI, Lynn MJ et al.(2013) Aggressive medical treatment with or without stenting in high-risk patients with intracranial artery stenosis (SAMMPRIS): the final results of a randomised trial. Lancet 2013. Devlin TG, Baxter BW, Feintuch TA et al.(2007) The Merci Retrieval System for acute stroke: the Southeast Regional Stroke Center experience. Neurocrit Care 2007; 6(1):11-21. Diringer MN, Bleck TP, Claude Hemphill J, 3rd, et al.(2011) Critical care management of patients following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: recommendations from the Neurocritical Care Society's Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference. Neurocrit Care. Sep 2011;15(2):211-240. PMID 21773873 Ec Ic Bypass Study Group.(1985) Failure of extracranial-intracranial arterial bypass to reduce the risk of ischemic stroke. Results of an international randomized trial. N Engl J Med. Nov 7 1985;313(19):1191-1200. PMID 2865674 Elliott JP, Newell DW, et al.(1998) Comparison of balloon angioplasty and papaverine infusion for the treatment of vasospasm following aneurysmal subarachoid hemorrhage. J Neurosurg, 1998; 88:277-84. Endovascular Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms With Flow Diverters:(2013) A Meta-Analysis. Endovascular Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms With Flow Diverters: Stroke 2013; 44(2):442-47. English JD, Yavagal DR, Gupta R, et al.(2016) Mechanical thrombectomy-ready comprehensive stroke center requirements and endovascular stroke systems of care: recommendations from the Endovascular Stroke Standards Committee of the Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology (SVIN). Interv Neurol. Mar 2016;4(3-4):138-150. PMID 27051410 Eskridge JM, McAuliffe W, et al.(1998) Balloon angioplasty for the treatment of vasospasm: results of first 50 cases. Neurosurg, 1998; 42:510-6. Eugene F, Gauvrit JY, Ferre JC, et al.(2014) One-Year MR Angiographic and Clinical Follow-Up after Intracranial Mechanical Thrombectomy Using a Stent Retriever Device. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Aug 14 2014. PMID 25125665 FDA Summary of Safety and Effectiveness Data.(2011) Pipeline Embolization Device. Available online at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh. Last accessed January 2011. FDA Summary of Safety and Effectiveness. 2011. Available online at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf10/P100018b.pdf. Last accessed 12/20/13. FDA Summary of Safety and Probable Benefit. Wingspan Stent System. Available online at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf5/H050001b.pdf. Last accessed August 25, 2010. FDA Summary of Safety and Probable Benefit.(2011) CORDIS ENTERPRISE Vascular Reconstruction Device and Delivery System. Available online at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh. Last accessed January 2011. FDA Summary of Safety and Probable Benefit.(2011) Neuroform Microdelivery Stent System. Available online at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh. Last accessed January 2011. Feng Z, Fang Y, Xu Y, et al.(2016) The safety and efficacy of low profile visualized intraluminal support (LVIS) stents in assisting coil embolization of intracranial saccular aneurysms: a single center experience. J Neurointerv Surg. Jan 8 2016. PMID 26747876 Fesl G, Patzig M, Holtmannspoetter M et al.(2011) Endovascular Mechanical Recanalisation After Intravenous Thrombolysis in Acute Anterior Circulation Stroke: The Impact of a New Temporary Stent. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2011; 35(6):1326-31. Fischer S, Aguilar-Perez M, Henkes E, et al.(2016) Initial Experience with p64: A Novel Mechanically Detachable Flow Diverter for the Treatment of Intracranial Saccular Sidewall Aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Nov 2015;36(11):2082-2089. PMID 26272970 Flint AC, Duckwiler GR, Budzik RF et al.(2007) Mechanical thrombectomy of intracranial internal carotid occlusion: pooled results of the MERCI and Multi MERCI Part I trials. Stroke 2007; 38(4):1274-80. Furlan A, Higashida R, Wechsler L et al.(2005) Intra-arterial prourokinase for acute ischemic stroke. The PROACT II study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1999; 282(21):2003-11. Ganesh A, Fraser JF, Gordon Perue GL, et al.(2022) Endovascular Treatment and Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke in Patients With Premorbid Disability or Dementia: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. May 2022; 53(5): e204-e217. PMID 35343235 Gascou G, Lobotesis K, Machi P, et al.(2014) Stent retrievers in acute ischemic stroke: complications and failures during the perioperative period. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Apr 2014;35(4):734-740. PMID 24157734 Gentric JC, Biondi A, Piotin M et al.(2013) Safety and efficacy of neuroform for treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a prospective, consecutive, French multicentric study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013; 34(6):1203-8. Geyik S, Yavuz K, Yurttutan N et al.(2013) Stent-assisted coiling in endovascular treatment of 500 consecutive cerebral aneurysms with long-term follow-up. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013; 34(11):2157-62. Gomez CR, Misra VK, et al.(2000) Elective stenting of symptomatic basilar artery stenosis. Stroke, 2000; 31:95-9. Goyal M, Demchuk AM, Menon BK, et al.(2015) Randomized assessment of rapid endovascular treatment of ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. Mar 12 2015;372(11):1019-1030. PMID 25671798 Gratz PP, Jung S, Schroth G et al.(2013) Outcome of Standard and High-Risk Patients With Acute Anterior Circulation Stroke After Stent Retriever Thrombectomy. Stroke 2013. Grech R, Schembri M, Thornton J.(2015) J. Stent-based thrombectomy versus intravenous tissue plasminogen activator in acute ischaemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Interv Neuroradiol. Dec 2015;21(6):684-690. PMID 26490828 Groschel K, Schnaudigel S, Pilgram SM et al.(2009) A systematic review on outcome after stenting for intracranial atherosclerosis. Stroke 2009; 40(5):e340-7. Guedon A, Clarencon F, Di Maria F, et al.(2016) Very late ischemic complications in flow-diverter stents: a retrospective analysis of a single-center series. J Neurosurg. Jan 29 2016:1-7. PMID 26824382 Hetts SW, Turk A, English JD, et al.(2014) Stent-assisted coiling versus coiling alone in unruptured intracranial aneurysms in the matrix and platinum science trial: safety, efficacy, and mid-term outcomes. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Apr 2014;35(4):698-705. PMID 24184523 Higashida RT, Meyers PM, et al.(2005) Intracranial angioplasty & stenting for cerebral atherosclerosis: A position statement of the American Society of Interventional & Therapeutic Neuroradiology, Society of Interventional Radiology, & the American Society of Neuroradiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2005; 16:1281-5. Higashide RT, Meyers PM.(2006) Intracranial angioplasty and stenting for cerrebral atherosclerosis: new treatments are needed!. Neuroradiol, 2006; 48:367-72. Hong KS, Ko SB, Lee JS, et al.(2015) Endovascular Recanalization Therapy in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Updated Metaanalysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Stroke. Sep 2015;17(3):268-281. PMID 26437993 Hong Y, Wang YJ, Deng Z, et al.(2014) Stent-assisted coiling versus coiling in treatment of intracranial aneurysm: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(1):e82311. PMID 24454690 Huo X, Gao F, Sun X, et al.(2016) Endovascular mechanical thrombectomy with the Solitaire device for the treatment of acute basilar artery occlusion. World Neurosurg. Feb 11 2016. PMID 26875658 Hwang G, Park H, Bang JS et al.(2011) Comparison of 2-year angiographic outcomes of stent- and nonstent-assisted coil embolization in unruptured aneurysms with an unfavorable configuration for coiling. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011; 32(9):1707-10. Image guided patient selection for interventional revascularization therapy (START). www.clinicaltrial.gov. Last accessed March 24, 2011. Interventional Management of Stroke (IMS) III Trial (IMSIII). (NCT00359424). www.clinicaltrial.gov. Last accessed February 15, 2011. Intra-arterial versus systemic thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. (NCT00640367). Last accessed March 24, 2011. Jauch EC, Saver JL, Adams HP, Jr. et al.(2013) 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 2013; 44(3):870-947. Jenkins JS, Patel SN, White CJ, et al.(2010) Endovascular stenting for vertebral artery stenosis. JACC, 2010; 55:538-542. Johnson AK, Heiferman DM, Lopes DK.(2013) Stent-assisted embolization of 100 middle cerebral artery aneurysms. J Neurosurg 2013; 118(5):950-5. Jovin TG, Chamorro A, Cobo E, et al.(2015) Thrombectomy within 8 hours after symptom onset in ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. Jun 11 2015;372(24):2296-2306. PMID 25882510 Jovin TG, Nogueira RG, Lansberg MG, et al.(2022) Thrombectomy for anterior circulation stroke beyond 6 h from time last known well (AURORA): a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. Lancet. Jan 15 2022; 399(10321): 249-258. PMID 34774198 Kadkhodayan Y, Rhodes N, Blackburn S et al.(2013) Comparison of Enterprise with Neuroform stent-assisted coiling of intracranial aneurysms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013; 200(4):872-8. Kahles T, Garcia-Esperon C, Zeller S, et al.(2016) Mechanical Thrombectomy Using the New ERIC Retrieval Device Is Feasible, Efficient, and Safe in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Swiss Stroke Center Experience. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Jan 2016;37(1):114-119. PMID 26294644 Kallmes DF, Hanel R, Lopes D, et al.(2014) International Retrospective Study of the Pipeline Embolization Device: A Multicenter Aneurysm Treatment Study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Oct 29 2014. PMID 25355814 Kan P, Siddiqui AH, Veznedaroglu E et al.(2012) Early postmarket results after treatment of intracranial aneurysms with the pipeline embolization device: a U.S. multicenter experience. Neurosurgery 2012; 71(6):1080-7; discussion 87-8. Kappelhof M, Marquering HA, Berkhemer OA, et al.(2015) Intra-arterial treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke and internal carotid artery occlusion: a literature review. J Neurointerv Surg. Jan 2015;7(1):8-15. PMID 24385555 Kennedy SA, Baerlocher MO, Baerlocher F, et al.(2016) Meta-Analysis of Local Endovascular Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke. J Vasc Interv Radiol. Jan 20 2016. PMID 26803573 Khoury NN, Darsaut TE, Ghostine J, et al.(2017) Endovascular thrombectomy and medical therapy versus medical therapy alone in acute stroke: A randomized care trial. J Neuroradiol. Jun 2017;44(3):198-202. PMID 28238522 Kidwell CS, Jahan R., Gornbein J, et al.(2013) A trial of imaging selection and endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 2013 Feb 8. [epub ahead of print]. Kim D, Jahan R, Starkman S et al.(2006) Endovascular mechanical clot retrieval in a broad ischemic stroke cohort. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006; 27(10):2048-52. Kim Y, Sharrief A, Kwak MJ, et al.(2022) Underutilization of Endovascular Therapy in Black Patients With Ischemic Stroke: An Analysis of State and Nationwide Cohorts. Stroke. Mar 2022; 53(3): 855-863. PMID 35067099 King B, Vaziri S, Singla A, et al.(2015) Clinical and angiographic outcomes after stent-assisted coiling of cerebral aneurysms with Enterprise and Neuroform stents: a comparative analysis of the literature. J Neurointerv Surg. Dec 2015;7(12):905-909. PMID 25352581 Kiselev R, Orlov K, Dubovoy A et al.(2018) Flow diversion versus parent artery occlusion with bypass in the treatment of complex intracranial aneurysms: Immediate and short-term outcomes of the randomized trial. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2018 Sep;172:183-189. PMID 30053620 Kulcsar Z, Goricke SL, Gizewski ER et al.(2013) Neuroform stent-assisted treatment of intracranial aneurysms: long-term follow-up study of aneurysm recurrence and in-stent stenosis rates. Neuroradiology 2013; 55(4):459-65. Lee KM, Jo KI, Jeon P, et al.(2016) Predictor and Prognosis of Procedural Rupture during Coil Embolization for Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysm. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. Jan 2016;59(1):6-10. PMID 26885280 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. May 1 2014. PMID 24789707 Lin LM, Colby GP, Kim JE et al.(2013) Immediate and follow-up results for 44 consecutive cases of small (<10 mm) internal carotid artery aneurysms treated with the pipeline embolization device. Surg Neurol Int 2013; 4:114. Lin R, Vora N, Zaidi S et al.(2009) Mechanical approaches combined with intra-arterial pharmacological therapy are associated with higher recanalization rates than either intervention alone in revascularization of acute carotid terminus occlusion. Stroke 2009; 40(6):2092-7. Liu X, Dai Q, Ye R et al.(2020) Endovascular treatment versus standard medical treatment for vertebrobasilar artery occlusion (BEST): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. 2020 Feb;19(2). PMID 31831388 Liu YQ, Wang QJ, Zheng T, et al.(2014) Single-centre comparison of procedural complications, clinical outcome, and angiographic follow-up between coiling and stent-assisted coiling for posterior communicating artery aneurysms. J Clin Neurosci. Dec 2014;21(12):2140-2144. PMID 25037315 Lubicz B, Van der Elst O, Collignon L, et al.(2014) Silk Flow-Diverter Stent for the Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms: A Series of 58 Patients with Emphasis on Long-Term Results. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Nov 6 2014. PMID 25376806 Luo J, Wang T, Yang K, et al.(2023) Endovascular therapy versus medical treatment for symptomatic intracranial artery stenosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. Feb 03 2023; 2(2): CD013267. PMID 36738471 Lutsep HL, Lynn MJ, Cotsonis GA, et al.(2015) Does the Stenting Versus Aggressive Medical Therapy Trial Support Stenting for Subgroups With Intracranial Stenosis? Stroke. Nov 2015;46(11):3282-3284. PMID 26382173 MacIsaac RL, Khatri P, Bendszus M, et al.(2015) A collaborative sequential meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials of endovascular therapy and tPA vs. tPA alone for acute ischemic stroke: ThRombEctomy And tPA (TREAT) analysis: statistical analysis plan for a sequential meta-analysis performed within the VISTA-Endovascular collaboration. Int J Stroke. Oct 2015;10 Suppl A100:136-144. PMID 26352438 Malatesta E, Nuzzi NP, Divenuto I et al.(2013) Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with flow-diverter stents: preliminary single-centre experience. Radiol Med 2013; 118(6):971-83. Marks MP, Wojack JC, et al.(2006) Angioplasty for symptomatic intracranial stenosis. Clinical Outcome. Stroke, 2006; 37:1016-20. Marmagkiolis K, Hakeem A, Cilingiroglu M, et al.(2015) Safety and Efficacy of Stent Retrievers for the Management of Acute Ischemic Stroke: Comprehensive Review and Meta-Analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Nov 2015;8(13):1758-1765. PMID 26476611 Mattle HP, Arnold M, Lindsberg PJ et al.(2011) Basilar artery occlusion. The Lancet Neurology 2011; 10(11):1002-14. Mechanical retrieval and recanalization of stroke clots using embolectomy (MR RrESCUE). (NCT00389467). www.clinicaltrial.gov. Last accessed February 15, 2011. Mendonca N, Flores A, Pagola J et al.(2012) Trevo versus Solitaire a Head-to-Head Comparison Between Two Heavy Weights of Clot Retrieval. Journal of Neuroimaging 2012. Mendonca N, Flores A, Pagola J, et al.(2014) Trevo versus solitaire a head-to-head comparison between two heavy weights of clot retrieval. . J Neuroimaging. Mar-Apr 2014;24(2):167-170. PMID 22913726 Meyers PM, Schumacher HC, Higashida RT et al.(2009) Indications for the performance of intracranial endovascular neurointerventional procedures: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, Interdisciplinary Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease, and Interdisciplinary Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research. Circulation 2009; 119(16):2235-49. Miao Z, Song L, Liebeskind DS, et al.(2014) Outcomes of tailored angioplasty and/or stenting for symptomatic intracranial atherosclerosis: a prospective cohort study after SAMMPRIS. J Neurointerv Surg. Apr 23 2014. PMID 24759694 Mocco J, Snyder KV, Albuquerque FC et al.(2009) Treatment of intracranial aneurysms with the Enterprise stent: a multicenter registry. J Neurosurg 2009; 110(1):35-9. Mocco J, Zaidat OO, von Kummer R, et al.(2016) Aspiration thrombectomy after intravenous alteplase versus intravenous alteplase alone. Stroke. Sep 2016;47(9):2331-2338. PMID 27486173 Mohlenbruch M, Stampfl S, Behrens L et al.(2013) Mechanical thrombectomy with stent retrievers in acute basilar artery occlusion. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013. Mokin M, Dumont TM, Veznedaroglu E et al.(2013) Solitaire flow restoration thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke: retrospective multicenter analysis of early postmarket experience after FDA approval. Neurosurgery 2013; 73(1):19-25; discussion 25-6. Mokin M, Kass-Hout T, Kass-Hout O et al.(2012) Intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke with internal carotid artery occlusion: a systematic review of clinical outcomes. Stroke 2012 [Epub ahead of print]. Mokin M, Kass-Hout T, Kass-Hout O et al.(2012) Intravenous Thrombolysis and endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke with internal carotid artery occlusion: a systematic review of clinical outcomes. Stroke 2012; 43(9):2362-8. Molina CA, Chamorro A, Rovira A et al.(2013) REVASCAT: a randomized trial of revascularization with SOLITAIRE FR(R) device vs. best medical therapy in the treatment of acute stroke due to anterior circulation large vessel occlusion presenting within eight-hours of symptom onset. Int J Stroke 2013. Mori T, Kazita K, et al.(2000) Short-term arteriographic and clinical outcome after cerebral angioplasty and stenting for intracranial vertebrobasilar and carotid atherosclerotic occlusive disease. Am J NeuroRad 2000; 21:249-54. Muir KW, Ford GA, Messow CM, et al.(2017) Endovascular therapy for acute ischaemic stroke: the Pragmatic Ischaemic Stroke Thrombectomy Evaluation (PISTE) randomised, controlled trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. Jan 2017;88(1):38-44. PMID 27756804 Nahser HC, Henkes H, et al.(2000) Intracranial vertebrobasilar stenosis: angioplasty and follow-up. Am J NeuroRad 2000; 21:1293-301. Newell DW, Elliott JP, et al.(1999) Endovascular therapy for aneurysmal vasospasm. Crit Care Clin, 1999; 15:685-99. Nikoubashman O, Reich A, Pjontek R, et al.(2014) Postinterventional subarachnoid haemorrhage after endovascular stroke treatment with stent retrievers. Neuroradiology. Dec 2014;56(12):1087-1096. PMID 25228448 Nogueira RG, Frei D, Kirmani JF, et al.(2018) Safety and efficacy of a 3-dimensional stent retriever with aspiration-based thrombectomy vs aspiration-based thrombectomy alone in acute ischemic stroke intervention: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol. Mar 1 2018;75(3):304-311. PMID 29296999 Nogueira RG, Jadhav AP, Haussen DC, et al.(2018) Thrombectomy 6 to 24 hours after stroke with a mismatch between deficit and infarct. N Engl J Med. Jan 4 2018;378(1):11-21. PMID 29129157 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 2012; 380(9849):1231-40. 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. Oct 6 2012;380(9849):1231-1240. PMID 22932714 Park BS, Kang CW, Kwon HJ et al.(2013) Endovascular mechanical thrombectomy in basilar artery occlusion: initial experience. J Cerebrovasc Endovasc Neurosurg 2013; 15(3):137-44. Park MS, Kilburg C, Taussky P, et al.(2016) Pipeline Embolization Device with or without Adjunctive Coil Embolization: Analysis of Complications from the IntrePED Registry. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Jan 14 2016. PMID 26767709 Parrilla G, Carreon E, Zamarro J, et al.(2014) Recanalization and Mortality Rates of Thrombectomy With Stent-Retrievers in Octogenarian Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. Jun 13 2014. PMID 24923241 Penumbra imaging collaborative study (PICS). (NCT00785161). www.clinicaltrial.gov. Last accessed March 24, 2011. Pereira VM, Gralla J, Davalos A et al.(2013) Prospective, multicenter, single-arm study of mechanical thrombectomy using Solitaire Flow Restoration in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke 2013; 44(10):2802-7. Pereira VM, Gralla J, Davalos A, et al.(2013) Prospective, multicenter, single-arm study of mechanical thrombectomy using Solitaire Flow Restoration in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. Oct 2013;44(10):2802-2807. PMID 23908066 Piano M, Valvassori L, Quilici L et al.(2013) Midterm and long-term follow-up of cerebral aneurysms treated with flow diverter devices: a single-center experience. J Neurosurg 2013; 118(2):408-16. Piotin M, Blanc R, Spelle L et al.(2010) Stent-assisted coiling of intracranial aneurysms: clinical and angiographic results in 216 consecutive aneurysms. Stroke 2010; 41(1):110-5. Powers WJ, Rabinstein AA, Ackerson T, et al.(2018) 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. Mar 2018;49(3):e46-e110. PMID 29367334 Powers WJ, Rabinstein AA, Ackerson T, et al.(2018) 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. Mar 2018;49(3):e46-e110. PMID 29367334. Qureshi AI, Chaudhry SA, Siddiq F, et al.(2013) A randomized trial comparing primary angioplasty versus stent placement for symptomatic intracranial stenosis. J Vasc Interv Neurol. Dec 2013;6(2):34-41. PMID 24358415 Qureshi AI, Hussein HM, El-Gengaihy A et al.(2008) Concurrent comparison of outcomes of primary angioplasty and of stent placement in high-risk patients with symptomatic intracranial stenosis. Neurosurgery 2008; 62(5):1053-60; discussion 60-2. Rai AT, Carpenter JS, Raghuram K et al.(2012) Endovascular therapy yields significantly superior outcomes for large vessel occlusions compared with intravenous thrombolysis: is it time to randomize? J Neurointerv Surg 2012 [Epub ahead of print]. Ramee SR, Dawson R, et al.(2001) Provisional stenting for symptomatic intracranial stenosis using a multidisciplinary approach: acute results, unexpected benefit, and one-year outcome. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2001; 52:457-67. Raymond J, Gentric JC, Darsaut TE, et al.(2017) Flow diversion in the treatment of aneurysms: a randomized care trial and registry. J Neurosurg. Sep 2017;127(3):454-462. PMID 27813466 Restrepo L, Bang OY, Ovbiagele B et al.(2009) Impact of hyperlipidemia and statins on ischemic stroke outcomes after intra-arterial fibrinolysis and percutaneous mechanical embolectomy. Cerebrovasc Dis 2009; 28(4):384-90. Roaldsen MB, Jusufovic M, Berge E, et al.(2021) Endovascular thrombectomy and intra-arterial interventions for acute ischaemic stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. Jun 14 2021; 6: CD007574. PMID 34125952 Rowland MJ, Hadjipavlou G, Kelly M, et al.(2012) Delayed cerebral ischaemia after subarachnoid haemorrhage: looking beyond vasospasm. Br J Anaesth. Sep 2012;109(3):315-329. PMID 22879655 Ryu CW, Park S, Shin HS, et al.(2015) Complications in Stent-Assisted Endovascular Therapy of Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms and Relevance to Antiplatelet Administration: A Systematic Review. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Sep 2015;36(9):1682-1688. PMID 26138136 Sacks D, Connors JJ, Black CM.(2013) Society of Interventional Radiology position statement on endovascular acute ischemic stroke interventions. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology 2013; 24(9):1263-6. Samaniego EA, Hetzel S, Thirunarayanan S et al.(2009) Outcome of symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic disease. Stroke 2009; 40(9):2983-7. Stroke 2009; 40(9):2983-7. Sanak D, Kocher M, Veverka T et al.(2013) Acute combined revascularization in acute ischemic stroke with intracranial arterial occlusion: self-expanding solitaire stent during intravenous thrombolysis. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2013; 24(9):1273-9. Saposnik G, Lebovic G, Demchuk A, et al.(2015) Added Benefit of Stent Retriever Technology for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Pooled Analysis of the NINDS tPA, SWIFT, and STAR Trials. Neurosurgery. Sep 2015;77(3):454-461. PMID 26280825 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 2012; 380(9849):1241-9. 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. Oct 6 2012;380(9849):1241-1249. PMID 22932715 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. The Lancet Neurology 2009; 8(8):724-30. Sen S, Huang DY, Akhavan O et al.(2009) IV vs. IA TPA in acute ischemic stroke with CT angiographic evidence of major vessel occlusion: a feasibility study. Neurocrit Care 2009; 11(1):76-81. Shapiro M, Becske T, Sahlein D et al.(2012) Stent-supported aneurysm coiling: a literature survey of treatment and follow-up. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012; 33(1):159-63. Sheriff F, Xu H, Maud A, et al.(2022) Temporal Trends in Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Endovascular Therapy in Acute Ischemic Stroke. J Am Heart Assoc. Mar 15 2022; 11(6): e023212. PMID 35229659 Singh B, Parsaik AK, Prokop LJ et al.(2013) Endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Mayo Clin Proc 2013; 88(10):1056-65. Smith WS, Sung G, Saver J et al.(2008) Mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke: final results of the Multi MERCI trial. Stroke 2008; 39(4):1205-12. Smith WS, Sung G, Starkman S et al.(2005) Safety and efficacy of mechanical embolectomy in acute ischemic stroke: Results of the MERCI trial. Stroke 2005; 36(7):1432-8. Solitaire FR with the intention for thrombectomy (SWIFT) study. (NCT01054560). www.clinicaltrial.gov. Last accessed March 24, 2011. Son S, Choi DS, Oh MK, et al.(2014) Comparison of Solitaire thrombectomy and Penumbra suction thrombectomy in patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by basilar artery occlusion. J Neurointerv Surg. Nov 19 2014. PMID 25411420 Song D, Kim BM, Kim DJ, et al.(2014) Comparison of stent retriever and intra-arterial fibrinolysis in patients with acute ischaemic stroke. Eur J Neurol. May 2014;21(5):779-784. PMID 24612359 Stead LG, Gilmore RM, Bellolio MF et al.(2008) Percutaneous clot removal devices in acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Neurol 2008; 65(8):1024-30. Stent angioplasty for vertebral artery disease. Hayes Directory, Sept 2006. Strauss I, Maimon S.(2016) Silk flow diverter in the treatment of complex intracranial aneurysms: a single-center experience with 60 patients. Acta Neurochir (Wien). Feb 2016;158(2):247-254. PMID 26630988 Sviri GE, Lewis DH, et al.(2004) Basilar artery vasospasm and delayed posterior circulation ischemia after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Stroke, 2004; 35:1867-72. Tang CW, Chang FC, Chern CM et al.(2011) Stenting versus medical treatment for severe symptomatic intracranial stenosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011; 32(5):911-6. Tanweer O, Wilson TA, El Helou A, et al.(2014) National trends in utilization and outcomes of angioplasty and stenting for revascularization in intracranial stenosis . Clin Neurol Neurosurg. Jan 2014;116:54-60. PMID 24314879 Taschner CA, Treier M, Schumacher M et al.(2011) Mechanical thrombectomy with the Penumbra recanalization device in acute ischemic stroke. J Neuroradiol 2011; 38(1):47-52. Tekle WG, Hassan AE, Jadhav AP, et al.(2020) Impact of Periprocedural and Technical Factors and Patient Characteristics on Revascularization and Outcome in the DAWN Trial. Stroke. Jan 2020; 51(1): 247-253. PMID 31744425 Thompson BG, Brown RD, Jr., Amin-Hanjani S, et al.(2015) Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. Aug 2015;46(8):2368-2400. PMID 26089327 Thrombectomy revascularization of large vessel occlusions in acute ischemic stroke (TREVO). (NCT01088672). Last accessed March 24, 2011. Toma AK, Robertson F, Wong K et al.(2013) Early single centre experience of flow diverting stents for the treatment of cerebral aneurysms. Br J Neurosurg 2013; 27(5):622-8. Tomsick TA, Yeatts SD, Liebeskind DS, et al.(2014) Endovascular revascularization results in IMS III: intracranial ICA and M1 occlusions. J Neurointerv Surg. Oct 23 2014. PMID 25342652 Tomsick TA.(2005) Mechanical embolus removal: a new day dawning. Stroke 2005; 36(7):1439-40. Touma L, Filion KB, Sterling LH, et al.(2016) Stent Retrievers for the Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. JAMA Neurol. Jan 25 2016. PMID 26810499 Turk AS, Turner R, Spiotta A, et al.(2014) Comparison of endovascular treatment approaches for acute ischemic stroke: cost effectiveness, technical success, and clinical outcomes. J Neurointerv Surg. Jul 15 2014. PMID 25028502 Urra X, San Roman L, Gil F, et al.(2014) Medical and Endovascular Treatment of Patients with Large Vessel Occlusion Presenting with Mild Symptoms: An Observational Multicenter Study. Cerebrovasc Dis. Dec 3 2014;38(6):418-424. PMID 25472576 van Rooij WJ, Bechan RS, Peluso JP, et al.(2014) Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms in the flow diverter era: frequency of use and results in a consecutive series of 550 treatments in a single centre. Interv Neuroradiol. Sep 15 2014;20(4):428-435. PMID 25207905 Wajnberg E, de Souza JM, Marchiori E et al.(2009) Single-center experience with the Neuroform stent for endovascular treatment of wide-necked intracranial aneurysms. Surg Neurol 2009; 72(6):612-9. Wakhloo AK, Lylyk P, de Vries J, et al.(2014) Surpass Flow Diverter in the Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms: A Prospective Multicenter Study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Aug 14 2014. PMID 25125666 Wang T, Luo J, Wang X, et al.(2020) Endovascular therapy versus medical treatment for symptomatic intracranial artery stenosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. Aug 11 2020; 8: CD013267. PMID 32789891 Yavuz K, Geyik S, Saatci I et al.(2013) Endovascular Treatment of middle cerebral artery aneurysms with flow modification with the use of the pipeline embolization device. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013. Yu SC, Leung TW, Lee KT, et al.(2014) Angioplasty and stenting of intracranial atherosclerosis with the Wingspan system: 1-year clinical and radiological outcome in a single Asian center. J Neurointerv Surg. Mar 2014;6(2):96-102. PMID 23512176 Zaidat OO, Castonguay AC, Gupta R, et al.(2014) North American Solitaire Stent Retriever Acute Stroke registry: post-marketing revascularization and clinical outcome results. J Neurointerv Surg. Oct 2014;6(8):584-588. PMID 24062252 Zheng F, Xie W.(2015) Imaging-Based Patient Selection and Endovascular Therapy of Ischemic Stroke: A Stratified Meta-Analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). Sep 2015;94(38):e1539. PMID 26402810 Zhou G, Zhu YQ, Su M, et al.(2015) Flow-Diverting Devices versus Coil Embolization for Intracranial Aneurysms: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis. World Neurosurg. Nov 14 2015. PMID 26585732 |
|
|
|
|
Group specific policy will supersede this policy when applicable. This policy does not apply to the Wal-Mart Associates Group Health Plan participants or to the Tyson Group Health Plan participants.
CPT Codes Copyright © 2025 American Medical Association. |
|