الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 286 |  |  |
| | | from | 286 | | |
Abstract
In conclusion EVT is safe in IVT ineligible patients with no increased risk of haemorrhagic transformation. Functional outcome is significantly better with EVT than in control group despite an apparent increase in mortality. Other independent factors predicting good outcome were lower initial stroke severity as assessed by initial NIHSS, lower admission systolic BP, less s-ICH and younger age. Haemorrhagic transformation and s-ICH weren’t increased by EVT suggesting safety of the procedure. Initial peripheral leucocytosis was significantly associated with both outcomes. Mortality in rtPA ineligible patients were better predicted by increased initial stroke severity as assessed by NIHSS and increased age, while MCA M2 occlusion and not M1 or ICA predicted survival. EVT didn’t decrease the mortality appeared as a neutral factor. In EVT patients ineligible for IVT, good outcome was predicted by younger age, successful recanalization and negatively associated with any ICH. Increased INR levels within limits was associated was good outcome. Haemorrhagic transformation was also predicted by increased initial WBCs count in the EVT group like the overall population but here successful recanalization was a protective factor from this ominous outcome. Mortality in the EVT group was only predicted by advanced age with neutral effect of EVT. In the overall study population and in the EVT group, initial stroke volume as indicated by ASPECT was not significant in all the outcomes suggesting a role of EVT in large infarction.