Intra-Arterial Thrombolysis Vs. Mechanical Thrombectomy in Acute Minor Ischemic Stroke Due to Large Vessel Occlusion.

Background: The efficacy and safety of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in acute large vessel occlusion (LVO) patients with minor stroke (NIHSS ≤ 5) remains undetermined. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of intra-arterial thrombolysis (IAT) alone vs. MT for LVO patients with minor stroke. Methods: Patients were selected from the Acute Ischemic Stroke Cooperation Group of Endovascular Treatment (ANGEL) registry, a prospective multicenter registry study, and divided into MT and IAT alone groups. We compared the outcome measures between the two groups, including 90-day functional outcome evaluated by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), the final recanalization level, intracranial hemorrhage, and mortality within 90-days by logistic regression models with adjustment. Besides the conventional multivariable analysis, we performed a sensitivity analysis by adjusting the propensity score to confirm our results. The propensity score was derived using a logistic regression model. Results: Of the 120 patients, 63 received IAT alone and 57 received MT as the first-line treatment strategy. As compared to MT group, patients in the IAT alone group were associated with a higher chance of 90-day mRS 0-2 [93.7% vs. 71.9%, odds ratio (OR) = 4.75, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20-18.80, Conclusions: Compared with MT, IAT may improve 90-day clinical outcomes with decreased ICH rate and mortality in LVO patients with minor stroke.