4.2 Article

Endovascular therapy for Acute ischemic Stroke Trial (EAST): study protocol for a prospective, multicentre control trial in China

期刊

STROKE AND VASCULAR NEUROLOGY
卷 1, 期 2, 页码 44-51

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/svn-2016-000022

关键词

-

资金

  1. Cerebrovascular Disease Center of Tiantan Hospital
  2. National Science and Technology Major Project of China [2011BAI08B02, 2015BAI12B04, 2015BAI12B02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and purpose: 5 recent trials have shown the benefit of endovascular treatment for acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) due to large vessel occlusion of the anterior circulation. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Solitaire thrombectomy in patients with moderate-to-severe stroke in the Chinese population, which has a high prevalence of intracranial atherosclerosis. Methods and analysis: This multicentre prospective control study will involve 17 stroke centres in China, and plans to recruit 150 patients in the intervention group, and 150 patients in the medical group, in which patients meet enrolment criteria but refuse intervention. Patients with AIS due to large vessel occlusion indicated for treatment with Solitaire stent retriever within 12 hours of symptom onset, and who meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria, will be enrolled in this study. The primary efficacy endpoint is functional independence as defined by a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score <= 2 at 90 days or by functional improvement as defined by mRS, using shift analysis. The procedural efficacy endpoint is arterial recanalisation of the occluded target vessel measured by a modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) score equal or superior to 2b right following the use of the study device. The primary safety endpoint is symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH) within 24 +/- 3 hours postprocedure. Ethics and dissemination: The protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee at the coordinating centre and by the local Institutional Review Board of each participating centre.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据