BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There are a limited number of studies comparing the Aperio mechanical thrombectomy device to other stent-based devices. In this paper, we compared the Aperio thrombectomy device to the Solitaire AB, FR and Revive devices in a model of the middle cerebral artery (MCA) within a modified pulsatile flow system. METHODS: Thrombi made of lamb's blood were placed into a pulsatile flow system perfused with Hartmann's solution at 80 bpm with a mean pressure of 90 mm Hg. 30 experiments were run with each device. RESULTS: Recanalization rates were similar for all three devices (90% with the Solitaire AB, FR, 80% with the Revive, and 90% with the Aperio). The mean number of attempts to retrieve the thrombus was also similar for all three devices (1.7 with the Solitaire AB, FR, 2.1 with the Revive, 1.6 with the Aperio). Clot fragmentation and embolization rates revealed no statistical significance but there was a trend towards lower embolization rates with the Aperio (23% compared to 40% with the Solitaire AB, FR and 47% with the Revive). The Aperio was the fastest to recanalize the MCA (mean of 66 seconds compared to 186 seconds for the Solitaire AB, FR and 169 seconds for the Revive). CONCLUSIONS: In this in vitro setting, the Aperio device seems to be an efficacious and safe device when compared to other similar clinically used mechanical thrombectomy devices. Larger clinical trials are warranted.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There are a limited number of studies comparing the Aperio mechanical thrombectomy device to other stent-based devices. In this paper, we compared the Aperio thrombectomy device to the Solitaire AB, FR and Revive devices in a model of the middle cerebral artery (MCA) within a modified pulsatile flow system. METHODS: Thrombi made of lamb's blood were placed into a pulsatile flow system perfused with Hartmann's solution at 80 bpm with a mean pressure of 90 mm Hg. 30 experiments were run with each device. RESULTS: Recanalization rates were similar for all three devices (90% with the Solitaire AB, FR, 80% with the Revive, and 90% with the Aperio). The mean number of attempts to retrieve the thrombus was also similar for all three devices (1.7 with the Solitaire AB, FR, 2.1 with the Revive, 1.6 with the Aperio). Clot fragmentation and embolization rates revealed no statistical significance but there was a trend towards lower embolization rates with the Aperio (23% compared to 40% with the Solitaire AB, FR and 47% with the Revive). The Aperio was the fastest to recanalize the MCA (mean of 66 seconds compared to 186 seconds for the Solitaire AB, FR and 169 seconds for the Revive). CONCLUSIONS: In this in vitro setting, the Aperio device seems to be an efficacious and safe device when compared to other similar clinically used mechanical thrombectomy devices. Larger clinical trials are warranted.
Authors: C Roth; D Junk; P Papanagiotou; A Keuler; H Körner; M Schumacher; W Reith Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-02-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Yang Liu; Mehdi Abbasi; Jorge L Arturo Larco; Ramanathan Kadirvel; David F Kallmes; Waleed Brinjikji; Luis Savastano Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2021-03-15 Impact factor: 8.572