Background: The benefit of endovascular thrombectomy for patients with in-hospital stroke remains unclear. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare the endovascular thrombectomy outcomes between in-hospital stroke and community-onset stroke among patients with acute ischemic stroke.
Methods: From January 2015 to July 2019, 362 consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation received endovascular thrombectomy in our centre. After propensity score matching with a ratio of 1:2 (in-hospital stroke:community-onset stroke), clinical characteristics and functional outcomes were compared between in-hospital stroke and community-onset stroke groups.
Results: Thirty-six patients with in-hospital stroke and 72 patients with community-onset stroke were enrolled. The number of patients with New York Heart Association classification III/IV (41.7% vs. 6.9%, p < 0.001) and with underlying cancer (25.0% vs. 2.8%, p < 0.001) was higher in the in-hospital stroke than in the community-onset stroke group. The intravenous thrombolysis rate was lower in the in-hospital stroke group (13.9% vs. 43.1%, p = 0.002). No significant difference in symptom onset to puncture (p = 0.618), symptom onset to recanalisation (p = 0.618) or good reperfusion (modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction ≥2b) rates (p = 0.852) was found between the groups. The favourable clinical outcome trend (modified Rankin scale ≤2 at 90 days) was inferior, but acceptable, in the in-hospital stroke, group compared to the community-onset stroke group (30.6% vs. 41.7%, p = 0.262).
Conclusion: Patients with in-hospital stroke had more disadvantageous comorbidities than those with community-onset stroke. Cardiac dysfunction seems to be associated with poor outcomes after thrombectomy. Nevertheless, endovascular thrombectomy still appears to be safe and effective for patients with in-hospital stroke.
Keywords: Stroke; in-hospital stroke; outcomes; propensity score; thrombectomy.