Key result
COVID-19 pandemic linked to ~17% lower rate of favorable functional outcomes after EVT for stroke.
Why the study?
Does the COVID-19 pandemic worsen 90-day functional outcomes and delay treatment times in acute ischemic stroke patients treated with endovascular therapy?
Cohort (n=1,329)
Yes
Does the COVID-19 pandemic worsen 90-day functional outcomes and delay treatment times in acute ischemic stroke patients treated with endovascular therapy?
The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with significant delays in acute stroke care workflows and a decreased rate of favorable 90-day functional outcomes for patients undergoing endovascular therapy.
OBJECTIVE: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to the implementation of wide-ranging institutional infection control protocols. The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of the pandemic on outcomes of large vessel occlusion (LVO) acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients treated with endovascular therapy (EVT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were obtained from prospectively collected quality improvement stroke databases at six Canadian comprehensive stroke centres from March 11, 2020 to March 11, 2021. This patient cohort was compared to pre-pandemic patients consecutively treated with EVT from March 11, 2019 to March 10, 2020. The primary outcome is a 90-day modified Rankin Score (mRS). The secondary outcomes are angiographic time metrics. RESULTS: A total of 1329 EVT patients (pre-pandemic n = 666) were included. The initial NIHSS was statistically significantly lower in the pandemic cohort. Other baseline patient characteristics were comparable between the two periods. Median (interquartile range, IQR) time from last seen normal (LSN) to emergency department (ED) (172 (68-316) vs 210 (97-382) min; p = 0.0001), LSN to puncture (235 (160-378) vs 280 (184-475); p < 0.0001), computed tomography (CT) to angiographic table (68 (44-108) vs 84 (57-125) min; p = 0.002), ED to angiographic table (65 (37-96) vs 80 (50-112) min; p = 0.001), CT to recanalization (117 (84-156) vs 130 (89-173) min; p = 0.038) and LSN to recanalization (279 (198-453) vs 327 (219-561) min; p = 0.002) were longer in the pandemic period as compared to the pre-pandemic. There were no significant differences in median time from angiographic table to arterial puncture (13 (8-19) vs 12 (9-16) min; p = 0.70) or arterial puncture to first pass (21 (14-31) vs 20 (14-30) min; p = 0.50). Patients were more likely to have favourable outcomes (mRS at 90 days score of ≤ 2) post-EVT pre-pandemic than pandemic (53% vs 44%; p = 0.02). Furthermore, analysis of the time interval from "LSN to arterial puncture" in relation to functional outcomes showed that the percentage of unfavorable outcomes increased among patients who underwent EVT within 240 minutes. Specifically, the rate of unfavorable outcomes rose from 32.9% to 42.9% (p = 0.37 for intervals under 150 minutes) and from 41.6% to 52.3% (p = 0.15 for intervals between 151 and 240 minutes) when comparing pre-pandemic to pandemic periods. However, the detrimental effect associated with the pandemic was diminished in patients who received EVT beyond 240 mins (p = 1.0). CONCLUSION: In this multicenter study involving six Canadian stroke centers, patients exhibited a higher probability of unfavorable long-term functional outcomes following EVT during the pandemic period compared to those in the pre-pandemic cohort, particularly during the first year of the pandemic.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhu et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Large vessel occlusion acute ischemic stroke (n=1,329). COVID-19 pandemic period vs. Pre-pandemic period was evaluated on Favourable outcome (90-day modified Rankin Score ≤ 2) (p=0.02). The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with fewer favorable 90-day functional outcomes following endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke compared to the pre-pandemic period (44% vs 53%; p=0.02).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: