C O A Tsang1,2, I H W Cheung3, K K Lau4, W Brinjikji2,5, D F Kallmes5, T Krings2. 1. From the Division of Neurosurgery (C.O.A.T.), Department of Surgery acotsang@hku.hk. 2. Department of Medical Imaging (C.O.A.T., W.B., T.K.), Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. Department of Diagnostic Radiology (I.H.W.C.), Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong. 4. Division of Neurology (K.K.L.), Department of Medicine, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. 5. Department of Radiology (W.B., D.F.K.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is ongoing debate regarding the optimal first-line thrombectomy technique for large-vessel occlusion. PURPOSE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies on stent retriever-first and aspiration-first thrombectomy. DATA SOURCES: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE from 2009 to February 2018. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently selected the studies. The primary end point was successful reperfusion (TICI 2b/3). DATA ANALYSIS: Random-effects meta-analysis was used for analysis. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eighteen studies including 2893 patients were included. There was no significant difference in the rate of final successful reperfusion (83.9% versus 83.3%; OR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.62%-1.27%) or good functional outcome (mRS 0-2) at 90 days (OR = 1.07; 95% CI, 0.80-1.44) between the stent-retriever thrombectomy and aspiration groups. The stent-retriever thrombectomy-first group achieved a statistically significant higher TICI 2b/3 rate after the first-line device than the aspiration-first group (74.9% versus 66.4%; OR = 1.53; 95% CI, 1.14%-2.05%) and resulted in lower use of a rescue device (19.9% versus 32.5%; OR = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14%-0.90%). The aspiration-first approach resulted in a statistically shorter groin-to-reperfusion time (weighted mean difference, 7.15 minutes; 95% CI, 1.63-12.67 minutes). There was no difference in the number of passes, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, vessel dissection or perforation, and mortality between groups. LIMITATIONS: Most of the included studies were nonrandomized. There was significant heterogeneity in some of the outcome variables. CONCLUSIONS: Stent-retriever thrombectomy-first and aspiration-first thrombectomy were associated with comparable final reperfusion rates and functional outcome. Stent-retriever thrombectomy was superior in achieving reperfusion as a stand-alone first-line technique, with lower use of rescue devices but a longer groin-to-reperfusion time.
BACKGROUND: There is ongoing debate regarding the optimal first-line thrombectomy technique for large-vessel occlusion. PURPOSE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies on stent retriever-first and aspiration-first thrombectomy. DATA SOURCES: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE from 2009 to February 2018. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently selected the studies. The primary end point was successful reperfusion (TICI 2b/3). DATA ANALYSIS: Random-effects meta-analysis was used for analysis. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eighteen studies including 2893 patients were included. There was no significant difference in the rate of final successful reperfusion (83.9% versus 83.3%; OR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.62%-1.27%) or good functional outcome (mRS 0-2) at 90 days (OR = 1.07; 95% CI, 0.80-1.44) between the stent-retriever thrombectomy and aspiration groups. The stent-retriever thrombectomy-first group achieved a statistically significant higher TICI 2b/3 rate after the first-line device than the aspiration-first group (74.9% versus 66.4%; OR = 1.53; 95% CI, 1.14%-2.05%) and resulted in lower use of a rescue device (19.9% versus 32.5%; OR = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14%-0.90%). The aspiration-first approach resulted in a statistically shorter groin-to-reperfusion time (weighted mean difference, 7.15 minutes; 95% CI, 1.63-12.67 minutes). There was no difference in the number of passes, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, vessel dissection or perforation, and mortality between groups. LIMITATIONS: Most of the included studies were nonrandomized. There was significant heterogeneity in some of the outcome variables. CONCLUSIONS: Stent-retriever thrombectomy-first and aspiration-first thrombectomy were associated with comparable final reperfusion rates and functional outcome. Stent-retriever thrombectomy was superior in achieving reperfusion as a stand-alone first-line technique, with lower use of rescue devices but a longer groin-to-reperfusion time.
Authors: Maxim Mokin; Kyle M Fargen; Christopher T Primiani; Zeguang Ren; Travis M Dumont; Leonardo B C Brasiliense; Guilherme Dabus; Italo Linfante; Peter Kan; Visish M Srinivasan; Mandy J Binning; Rishi Gupta; Aquilla S Turk; Lucas Elijovich; Adam Arthur; Hussain Shallwani; Elad I Levy; Adnan H Siddiqui Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2016-09-29 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Maxim Mokin; Christopher T Primiani; Zeguang Ren; Peter Kan; Edward Duckworth; Raymond D Turner; Aquilla S Turk; Kyle M Fargen; Guilherme Dabus; Italo Linfante; Travis M Dumont; Leonardo B C Brasiliense; Hussain Shallwani; Kenneth V Snyder; Adnan H Siddiqui; Elad I Levy Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Tudor G Jovin; Angel Chamorro; Erik Cobo; María A de Miquel; Carlos A Molina; Alex Rovira; Luis San Román; Joaquín Serena; Sonia Abilleira; Marc Ribó; Mònica Millán; Xabier Urra; Pere Cardona; Elena López-Cancio; Alejandro Tomasello; Carlos Castaño; Jordi Blasco; Lucía Aja; Laura Dorado; Helena Quesada; Marta Rubiera; María Hernandez-Pérez; Mayank Goyal; Andrew M Demchuk; Rüdiger von Kummer; Miquel Gallofré; Antoni Dávalos Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-04-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mayank Goyal; Andrew M Demchuk; Bijoy K Menon; Muneer Eesa; Jeremy L Rempel; John Thornton; Daniel Roy; Tudor G Jovin; Robert A Willinsky; Biggya L Sapkota; Dar Dowlatshahi; Donald F Frei; Noreen R Kamal; Walter J Montanera; Alexandre Y Poppe; Karla J Ryckborst; Frank L Silver; Ashfaq Shuaib; Donatella Tampieri; David Williams; Oh Young Bang; Blaise W Baxter; Paul A Burns; Hana Choe; Ji-Hoe Heo; Christine A Holmstedt; Brian Jankowitz; Michael Kelly; Guillermo Linares; Jennifer L Mandzia; Jai Shankar; Sung-Il Sohn; Richard H Swartz; Philip A Barber; Shelagh B Coutts; Eric E Smith; William F Morrish; Alain Weill; Suresh Subramaniam; Alim P Mitha; John H Wong; Mark W Lowerison; Tolulope T Sajobi; Michael D Hill Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-02-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: B Gory; X Armoiry; R Sivan-Hoffmann; M Piotin; M Mazighi; B Lapergue; R Blanc; F Turjman Journal: Eur J Neurol Date: 2017-11-24 Impact factor: 6.089
Authors: Josser E Delgado Almandoz; Yasha Kayan; Mark L Young; Jennifer L Fease; Jill M Scholz; Anna M Milner; Timothy H Hehr; Pezhman Roohani; Maximilian Mulder; Ronald M Tarrel Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2015-12-14 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: William J Powers; Colin P Derdeyn; José Biller; Christopher S Coffey; Brian L Hoh; Edward C Jauch; Karen C Johnston; S Claiborne Johnston; Alexander A Khalessi; Chelsea S Kidwell; James F Meschia; Bruce Ovbiagele; Dileep R Yavagal Journal: Stroke Date: 2015-06-29 Impact factor: 10.170
Authors: Anderson Chun On Tsang; Frederick Chun Pong Tsang; Raymand Lee; Gilberto Ka Kit Leung; Wai Man Lui Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2019-06-05 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: P F Xing; P F Yang; Z F Li; L Zhang; H J Shen; Y X Zhang; Y W Zhang; J M Liu Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-02-13 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: D A Schartz; N R Ellens; G S Kohli; S M K Akkipeddi; G P Colby; T Bhalla; T K Mattingly; M T Bender Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2022-03-17 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Andrej Klepanec; Jan Harsany; Jozef Haring; Miroslav Mako; Matus Hoferica; Matej Rusina; Juraj Cisar; Georgi Krastev Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2020-03-17 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: Scott B Raymond; Mehr Nasir-Moin; Matthew J Koch; James D Rabinov; Thabele Leslie-Mazwi; Aman B Patel Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2020-01-22 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: Roisin M O'Cearbhaill; J Alderson; S Power; D B Herlihy; P Brennan; A O'Hare; J Thornton Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2021-06-14 Impact factor: 1.764