Evidence Hub

Arterial Collaterals and Endovascular Treatment Effect in Acute Ischemic Stroke with Large Infarct: A Secondary Analysis of the TENSION Trial

L. Winkelmeier, H. Kniep, G. Thomalla, M. Bendszus, F. Subtil, S. Bonekamp, A. Aamodt, B. Fuentes et al.

Radiology, 2025

253 participants · 19 citations

Abstract

Background Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that endovascular thrombectomy reduces functional disability in patients with large ischemic stroke; arterial collateral status might be used to select these patients for endovascular thrombectomy. Purpose To investigate whether arterial collateral status modifies the treatment effect of endovascular thrombectomy in patients with large ischemic stroke. Materials and Methods The Efficacy and Safety of Thrombectomy in Stroke with Extended Lesion and Extended Time Window (TENSION) trial was a prospective, multicenter, randomized study investigating participants with acute large ischemic stroke due to anterior circulation large-vessel occlusion. Participants with an Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score of 3-5 were enrolled at 41 participating centers between July 2018 and February 2023. Participants were randomly assigned to undergo either endovascular thrombectomy with best medical treatment or best medical treatment alone within 12 hours from stroke onset. Collateral status was graded on pretreatment single-phase CT angiography (CTA) images using the Tan score and dichotomized into poor (grade, 0-1) or good (grade, 2-3) based on the extent of collateral supply filling the affected middle cerebral artery territory. The primary outcome was the shift on the 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Results Of 253 randomized patients, 201 with pretreatment CTA were included (median age, 74 years; IQR, 66-80 years; 103 [51.2%]…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 253 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free