Thanh N Nguyen1, Timothy Malisch, Alicia C Castonguay, Rishi Gupta, Chung-Huan J Sun, Coleman O Martin, William E Holloway, Nils Mueller-Kronast, Joey D English, Italo Linfante, Guilherme Dabus, Franklin A Marden, Hormozd Bozorgchami, Andrew Xavier, Ansaar T Rai, Michael T Froehler, Aamir Badruddin, Muhammad Taqi, Michael G Abraham, Vallabh Janardhan, Hashem Shaltoni, Roberta Novakovic, Albert J Yoo, Alex Abou-Chebl, Peng R Chen, Gavin W Britz, Ritesh Kaushal, Ashish Nanda, Mohammad A Issa, Hesham Masoud, Raul G Nogueira, Alexander M Norbash, Osama O Zaidat. 1. From the Departments of Neurology (T.N.N., H.M.), Neurosurgery (T.N.N.), and Radiology (T.N.N., H.M., A.M.N.), Boston University School of Medicine, MA; Alexian Brothers Medical Center, Elk Grove Village, IL (T.M., F.A.M.); Departments of Neurosurgery (O.O.Z.), Neurology (A.C.C., M.A.I., O.O.Z.), and Radiology (O.O.Z.), Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee; Department of Neurology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA (R.G., C.-H.J.S., R.G.N.); St. Luke's Neuroscience Institute, Kansas City, MO (C.O.M., W.E.H.); Department of Neurology, Delray Medical Center, Delray Beach, FL (N.M.-K.); California Pacific Medical Center, San Francisco (J.D.E.); Division of Interventional Neuroradiology, Baptist Cardiac and Vascular Institute, Miami, FL (I.L., G.D.); Oregon Health and Sciences, Portland (H.B.); Department of Neurology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI (A.X.); Department of Radiology, West Virginia University Hospital, Morgantown (A.T.R.); Department of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Radiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN (M.T.F.); Department of Neurosurgery, Presence Saint Joseph Medical Center, Joliet, IL (A.B.); Desert Regional Medical Center, Palm Springs, CA (M.T.); University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City (M.G.A.); Texas Stroke Institute, Dallas Fort-Worth Metroplex (V.J.); Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX (H.S.); Departments of Radiology and Neurology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (R.N.); Department of Radiology, Division of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston (A.J.Y.); Department of Neurology, University of Louisville Medical School, KY (A.-A.C.); University of Texas, Houston (P.R.C.); Department of Neurosurgery, Methodist Neurological Institute, Houston, TX (G.W.B.); Tenet Health Florida, Hialeah (R.K.); and University of Missouri, Columbia (A.N.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Efficient and timely recanalization is an important goal in acute stroke endovascular therapy. Several studies demonstrated improved recanalization and clinical outcomes with the stent retriever devices compared with the Merci device. The goal of this study was to evaluate the role of the balloon guide catheter (BGC) and recanalization success in a substudy of the North American Solitaire Acute Stroke (NASA) registry. METHODS: The investigator-initiated NASA registry recruited 24 clinical sites within North America to submit demographic, clinical, site-adjudicated angiographic, and clinical outcome data on consecutive patients treated with the Solitaire Flow Restoration device. BGC use was at the discretion of the treating physicians. RESULTS: There were 354 patients included in the NASA registry. BGC data were reported in 338 of 354 patients in this subanalysis, of which 149 (44%) had placement of a BGC. Mean age was 67.3±15.2 years, and median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 18. Patients with BGC had more hypertension (82.4% versus 72.5%; P=0.05), atrial fibrillation (50.3% versus 32.8%; P=0.001), and were more commonly administered tissue plasminogen activator (51.6% versus 38.8%; P=0.02) compared with patients without BGC. Time from symptom onset to groin puncture and number of passes were similar between the 2 groups. Procedure time was shorter in patients with BGC (120±28.5 versus 161±35.6 minutes; P=0.02), and less adjunctive therapy was used in patients with BGC (20% versus 28.6%; P=0.05). Thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 3 reperfusion scores were higher in patients with BGC (53.7% versus 32.5%; P<0.001). Distal emboli and emboli in new territory were similar between the 2 groups. Discharge National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score (mean, 12±14.5 versus 17.5±16; P=0.002) and good clinical outcome at 3 months were superior in patients with BGC compared with patients without (51.6% versus 35.8%; P=0.02). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the use of BGC was an independent predictor of good clinical outcome (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-4.9). CONCLUSIONS: Use of a BGC with the Solitaire Flow Restoration device resulted in superior revascularization results, faster procedure times, decreased need for adjunctive therapy, and improved clinical outcome.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Efficient and timely recanalization is an important goal in acute stroke endovascular therapy. Several studies demonstrated improved recanalization and clinical outcomes with the stent retriever devices compared with the Merci device. The goal of this study was to evaluate the role of the balloon guide catheter (BGC) and recanalization success in a substudy of the North American Solitaire Acute Stroke (NASA) registry. METHODS: The investigator-initiated NASA registry recruited 24 clinical sites within North America to submit demographic, clinical, site-adjudicated angiographic, and clinical outcome data on consecutive patients treated with the Solitaire Flow Restoration device. BGC use was at the discretion of the treating physicians. RESULTS: There were 354 patients included in the NASA registry. BGC data were reported in 338 of 354 patients in this subanalysis, of which 149 (44%) had placement of a BGC. Mean age was 67.3±15.2 years, and median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 18. Patients with BGC had more hypertension (82.4% versus 72.5%; P=0.05), atrial fibrillation (50.3% versus 32.8%; P=0.001), and were more commonly administered tissue plasminogen activator (51.6% versus 38.8%; P=0.02) compared with patients without BGC. Time from symptom onset to groin puncture and number of passes were similar between the 2 groups. Procedure time was shorter in patients with BGC (120±28.5 versus 161±35.6 minutes; P=0.02), and less adjunctive therapy was used in patients with BGC (20% versus 28.6%; P=0.05). Thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 3 reperfusion scores were higher in patients with BGC (53.7% versus 32.5%; P<0.001). Distal emboli and emboli in new territory were similar between the 2 groups. Discharge National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score (mean, 12±14.5 versus 17.5±16; P=0.002) and good clinical outcome at 3 months were superior in patients with BGC compared with patients without (51.6% versus 35.8%; P=0.02). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the use of BGC was an independent predictor of good clinical outcome (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-4.9). CONCLUSIONS: Use of a BGC with the Solitaire Flow Restoration device resulted in superior revascularization results, faster procedure times, decreased need for adjunctive therapy, and improved clinical outcome.
Authors: Volker Maus; Daniel Behme; Christoph Kabbasch; Jan Borggrefe; Ioannis Tsogkas; Omid Nikoubashman; Martin Wiesmann; Michael Knauth; Anastasios Mpotsaris; Marios Nikos Psychogios Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2017-02-13 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: Francesco Massari; Nils Henninger; Juan Diego Lozano; Anand Patel; Anna Luisa Kuhn; Mary Howk; Mary Perras; Christopher Brooks; Matthew J Gounis; Peter Kan; Ajay K Wakhloo; Ajit S Puri Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: Ashutosh P Jadhav; Amin Aghaebrahim; Anat Horev; Dan-Victor Giurgiutiu; Andrew F Ducruet; Brian Jankowitz; Tudor G Jovin Journal: Interv Neurol Date: 2016-10-07