BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Embolus Retriever with Interlinked Cages (ERIC) device is a novel stent retriever for mechanical thrombectomy. It consists of interlinked cages and could improve procedural benchmarks and clinical outcome compared with classic stent retrievers. This study compares the rates of recanalization, favorable clinical outcome, procedural adverse events, and benchmarks between the ERIC device and classic stent retrievers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 545 patients treated with thrombectomy between 2012 and 2015, 316 patients were included. The mean age was 69 ±13 years, the mean baseline NIHSS score was 17 ± 5, and 174 (55%) were men. The ERIC was used as the primary thrombectomy device in 59 (19%) patients. In a propensity score matched analysis including the NIHSS score, clot location, delay to groin puncture, neurointerventionalist, and anesthetic management, 57 matched pairs were identified. RESULTS: Patients treated with the ERIC device compared with classic stent retrievers showed equal rates of recanalization (86% versus 81%, P = .61), equal favorable 3-month clinical outcome (mRS 0-2: 46% versus 40%, P = .71), and procedural adverse events (28% versus 30%, P = 1.00). However, in patients treated with the ERIC device, thrombectomy procedures were less time-consuming (67 versus 98 minutes, P = .009) and a rescue device was needed less often (18% versus 39%, P = .02) compared with classic stent retrievers. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical thrombectomy with the ERIC device is effective and safe. Rates of favorable procedural and clinical outcomes are at least as good as those with classic stent retrievers. Of note, the ERIC device might be time-saving and decrease the need for rescue devices. These promising results call for replication in larger prospective clinical trials.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Embolus Retriever with Interlinked Cages (ERIC) device is a novel stent retriever for mechanical thrombectomy. It consists of interlinked cages and could improve procedural benchmarks and clinical outcome compared with classic stent retrievers. This study compares the rates of recanalization, favorable clinical outcome, procedural adverse events, and benchmarks between the ERIC device and classic stent retrievers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 545 patients treated with thrombectomy between 2012 and 2015, 316 patients were included. The mean age was 69 ±13 years, the mean baseline NIHSS score was 17 ± 5, and 174 (55%) were men. The ERIC was used as the primary thrombectomy device in 59 (19%) patients. In a propensity score matched analysis including the NIHSS score, clot location, delay to groin puncture, neurointerventionalist, and anesthetic management, 57 matched pairs were identified. RESULTS:Patients treated with the ERIC device compared with classic stent retrievers showed equal rates of recanalization (86% versus 81%, P = .61), equal favorable 3-month clinical outcome (mRS 0-2: 46% versus 40%, P = .71), and procedural adverse events (28% versus 30%, P = 1.00). However, in patients treated with the ERIC device, thrombectomy procedures were less time-consuming (67 versus 98 minutes, P = .009) and a rescue device was needed less often (18% versus 39%, P = .02) compared with classic stent retrievers. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical thrombectomy with the ERIC device is effective and safe. Rates of favorable procedural and clinical outcomes are at least as good as those with classic stent retrievers. Of note, the ERIC device might be time-saving and decrease the need for rescue devices. These promising results call for replication in larger prospective clinical trials.
Authors: Bruce C V Campbell; Geoffrey A Donnan; Kennedy R Lees; Werner Hacke; Pooja Khatri; Michael D Hill; Mayank Goyal; Peter J Mitchell; Jeffrey L Saver; Hans-Christoph Diener; Stephen M Davis Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Jeffrey L Saver; Mayank Goyal; Alain Bonafe; Hans-Christoph Diener; Elad I Levy; Vitor M Pereira; Gregory W Albers; Christophe Cognard; David J Cohen; Werner Hacke; Olav Jansen; Tudor G Jovin; Heinrich P Mattle; Raul G Nogueira; Adnan H Siddiqui; Dileep R Yavagal; Blaise W Baxter; Thomas G Devlin; Demetrius K Lopes; Vivek K Reddy; Richard du Mesnil de Rochemont; Oliver C Singer; Reza Jahan Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-04-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Olvert A Berkhemer; Puck S S Fransen; Debbie Beumer; Lucie A van den Berg; Hester F Lingsma; Albert J Yoo; Wouter J Schonewille; Jan Albert Vos; Paul J Nederkoorn; Marieke J H Wermer; Marianne A A van Walderveen; Julie Staals; Jeannette Hofmeijer; Jacques A van Oostayen; Geert J Lycklama à Nijeholt; Jelis Boiten; Patrick A Brouwer; Bart J Emmer; Sebastiaan F de Bruijn; Lukas C van Dijk; L Jaap Kappelle; Rob H Lo; Ewoud J van Dijk; Joost de Vries; Paul L M de Kort; Willem Jan J van Rooij; Jan S P van den Berg; Boudewijn A A M van Hasselt; Leo A M Aerden; René J Dallinga; Marieke C Visser; Joseph C J Bot; Patrick C Vroomen; Omid Eshghi; Tobien H C M L Schreuder; Roel J J Heijboer; Koos Keizer; Alexander V Tielbeek; Heleen M den Hertog; Dick G Gerrits; Renske M van den Berg-Vos; Giorgos B Karas; Ewout W Steyerberg; H Zwenneke Flach; Henk A Marquering; Marieke E S Sprengers; Sjoerd F M Jenniskens; Ludo F M Beenen; René van den Berg; Peter J Koudstaal; Wim H van Zwam; Yvo B W E M Roos; Aad van der Lugt; Robert J van Oostenbrugge; Charles B L M Majoie; Diederik W J Dippel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-12-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Randall T Higashida; Anthony J Furlan; Heidi Roberts; Thomas Tomsick; Buddy Connors; John Barr; William Dillon; Steven Warach; Joseph Broderick; Barbara Tilley; David Sacks Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-07-17 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Maxim Mokin; Simon Morr; Sabareesh K Natarajan; Ning Lin; Kenneth V Snyder; L Nelson Hopkins; Adnan H Siddiqui; Elad I Levy Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2014-02-07 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Chelsea S Kidwell; Reza Jahan; Jeffrey Gornbein; Jeffry R Alger; Val Nenov; Zahra Ajani; Lei Feng; Brett C Meyer; Scott Olson; Lee H Schwamm; Albert J Yoo; Randolph S Marshall; Philip M Meyers; Dileep R Yavagal; Max Wintermark; Judy Guzy; Sidney Starkman; Jeffrey L Saver Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-02-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Henrik Steglich-Arnholm; Markus Holtmannspötter; Daniel Kondziella; Aase Wagner; Trine Stavngaard; Mats E Cronqvist; Klaus Hansen; Joan Højgaard; Sarah Taudorf; Derk Wolfgang Krieger Journal: J Neurol Date: 2015-09-07 Impact factor: 4.849