Sung Tae Kim1, Sung-Chul Jin2, Hae Woong Jeong3, Jung Hwa Seo4, Sam Yeol Ha5, Hae Wook Pyun6. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University, Busan, Korea. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Haeundae Paik Hospital, Inje University, Busan, Korea. 3. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University, Busan, Korea. 4. Department of Neurology, Busan Paik Hospital, Inje University, Busan, Korea. 5. Department of Neurology, Haeundae Paik Hospital, Inje University, Busan, Korea. 6. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, S Pohang Hospital, Pohang, Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Unexpected Solitaire stent detachment can occur during mechanical Solitaire thrombectomy. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the influencing factors causing unexpected Solitaire stent detachment and the clinical outcomes. METHODS: Between October 2011 to December 2013, 232 cases of mechanical Solitaire thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke were performed in 3 stroke centers. During this period, we encountered unexpected Solitaire stent detachments during mechanical Solitaire thrombectomies in 9 cases. RESULTS: Solitaire stents unexpectedly detached in 9 cases (3.9%) during the retrieval of Solitaire stents. The median patient age was 76 years. The occlusion sites of the unexpected stent detachment were the proximal middle cerebral artery (MCA) in 7 cases and the internal carotid artery in 2 cases. The sizes of the stents that unexpectedly detached were 6×30 mm in 7 cases, 5×30 mm in 1 case, and 4×20 mm in 1 case. Four patients had unexpected detachment at the first retrieval, 1 patient at the second, 3 patients at the third, and 1 patient at the fifth. In all of the cases of unexpected detachment at the first retrieval, the stent deployment site was the proximal MCA. After detachment, a proximal marker of the Solitaire stent was observed in 3 patients. However, no marker was visible in the remaining 6 patients. CONCLUSION: Unexpected Solitaire stent detachment should be considered in the first instance of stent retrieval for a relatively large-diameter stent, especially in elderly patients with MCA occlusions.
OBJECTIVE: Unexpected Solitaire stent detachment can occur during mechanical Solitaire thrombectomy. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the influencing factors causing unexpected Solitaire stent detachment and the clinical outcomes. METHODS: Between October 2011 to December 2013, 232 cases of mechanical Solitaire thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke were performed in 3 stroke centers. During this period, we encountered unexpected Solitaire stent detachments during mechanical Solitaire thrombectomies in 9 cases. RESULTS: Solitaire stents unexpectedly detached in 9 cases (3.9%) during the retrieval of Solitaire stents. The median patient age was 76 years. The occlusion sites of the unexpected stent detachment were the proximal middle cerebral artery (MCA) in 7 cases and the internal carotid artery in 2 cases. The sizes of the stents that unexpectedly detached were 6×30 mm in 7 cases, 5×30 mm in 1 case, and 4×20 mm in 1 case. Four patients had unexpected detachment at the first retrieval, 1 patient at the second, 3 patients at the third, and 1 patient at the fifth. In all of the cases of unexpected detachment at the first retrieval, the stent deployment site was the proximal MCA. After detachment, a proximal marker of the Solitaire stent was observed in 3 patients. However, no marker was visible in the remaining 6 patients. CONCLUSION: Unexpected Solitaire stent detachment should be considered in the first instance of stent retrieval for a relatively large-diameter stent, especially in elderly patients with MCA occlusions.
Authors: Jeffrey L Saver; Reza Jahan; Elad I Levy; Tudor G Jovin; Blaise Baxter; Raul G Nogueira; Wayne Clark; Ronald Budzik; Osama O Zaidat Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-08-26 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Vitor M Pereira; Jan Gralla; Antoni Davalos; Alain Bonafé; Carlos Castaño; René Chapot; David S Liebeskind; Raul G Nogueira; Marcel Arnold; Roman Sztajzel; Thomas Liebig; Mayank Goyal; Michael Besselmann; Antonio Moreno; Alfredo Moreno; Gerhard Schroth Journal: Stroke Date: 2013-08-01 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Maxim Mokin; Travis M Dumont; Erol Veznedaroglu; Mandy J Binning; Kenneth M Liebman; Richard D Fessler; Chiu Yuen To; Raymond D Turner; Aquilla S Turk; M Imran Chaudry; Adam S Arthur; Benjamin D Fox; Ricardo A Hanel; Rabih G Tawk; Peter Kan; John R Gaughen; Giuseppe Lanzino; Demetrius K Lopes; Michael Chen; Roham Moftakhar; Joshua T Billingsley; Andrew J Ringer; Kenneth V Snyder; L Nelson Hopkins; Adnan H Siddiqui; Elad I Levy Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Andreas Simgen; Michael Kettner; Frida Juliane Webelsiep; Toshiki Tomori; Ruben Mühl-Benninghaus; Umut Yilmaz; Pervinder Bhogal; Matthias W Laschke; Michael D Menger; Wolfgang Reith; Philipp Dietrich Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2020-05-18 Impact factor: 3.649