P F Xing1, P F Yang1, Z F Li1, L Zhang1, H J Shen1, Y X Zhang1, Y W Zhang1, J M Liu2. 1. From the Department of Stroke Center, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China. 2. From the Department of Stroke Center, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China. Liu118@vip.163.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is no consensus on endovascular treatment for terminal ICA. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the comparative safety and efficacy of preferred aspiration thrombectomy and stent retriever thrombectomy for revascularization in patients with isolated terminal ICA occlusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with terminal ICA occlusion treated with aspiration thrombectomy or stent retriever thrombectomy in our center, from September 2013 to November 2018. To minimize the case bias, propensity score matching was performed. The primary outcomes were successful reperfusion defined by expanded TICI grades 2b-3 at the end of all endovascular procedures and puncture-to-reperfusion time. RESULTS: A total of 109 consecutive patients with terminal ICA occlusion were divided into the aspiration thrombectomy group (40 patients) and the stent retriever thrombectomy group (69 patients), and 30 patients were included in each group after propensity score matching. The proportion of complete reperfusion was significantly higher in the aspiration thrombectomy group (OR 4.75 [95% CI, 1.10-1.38]; P = .002). The median puncture-to-reperfusion time in the aspiration thrombectomy group was shorter than that in the stent retriever thrombectomy group (38 versus 69 minutes; P = .001). Fewer intracerebral hemorrhage events were recorded in the aspiration thrombectomy group (OR 0.29 [95% CI, 0.09-0.90]; P = .028). No significant differences were observed for good outcomes (OR 1.92 [95% CI, 0.86-4.25]) and mortality (OR 0.84 [95% CI, 0.29-2.44]) at 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of terminal ICA occlusion, aspiration thrombectomy was technically superior to stent retriever thrombectomy in the absence of a balloon guide catheter in achieving successful reperfusion with shorter puncture-to-reperfusion time and procedure-related adverse events.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is no consensus on endovascular treatment for terminal ICA. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the comparative safety and efficacy of preferred aspiration thrombectomy and stent retriever thrombectomy for revascularization in patients with isolated terminal ICA occlusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with terminal ICA occlusion treated with aspiration thrombectomy or stent retriever thrombectomy in our center, from September 2013 to November 2018. To minimize the case bias, propensity score matching was performed. The primary outcomes were successful reperfusion defined by expanded TICI grades 2b-3 at the end of all endovascular procedures and puncture-to-reperfusion time. RESULTS: A total of 109 consecutive patients with terminal ICA occlusion were divided into the aspiration thrombectomy group (40 patients) and the stent retriever thrombectomy group (69 patients), and 30 patients were included in each group after propensity score matching. The proportion of complete reperfusion was significantly higher in the aspiration thrombectomy group (OR 4.75 [95% CI, 1.10-1.38]; P = .002). The median puncture-to-reperfusion time in the aspiration thrombectomy group was shorter than that in the stent retriever thrombectomy group (38 versus 69 minutes; P = .001). Fewer intracerebral hemorrhage events were recorded in the aspiration thrombectomy group (OR 0.29 [95% CI, 0.09-0.90]; P = .028). No significant differences were observed for good outcomes (OR 1.92 [95% CI, 0.86-4.25]) and mortality (OR 0.84 [95% CI, 0.29-2.44]) at 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of terminal ICA occlusion, aspiration thrombectomy was technically superior to stent retriever thrombectomy in the absence of a balloon guide catheter in achieving successful reperfusion with shorter puncture-to-reperfusion time and procedure-related adverse events.
Authors: Sibylle Stampfl; Johannes Pfaff; Christian Herweh; Mirko Pham; Simon Schieber; Peter A Ringleb; Martin Bendszus; Markus A Möhlenbruch Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2016-04-07 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: D O'Neill; E Griffin; K M Doyle; S Power; P Brennan; M Sheehan; A O'Hare; S Looby; A M da Silva Santos; R Rossi; J Thornton Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-07-18 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Ryan A McTaggart; Eric L Tung; Shadi Yaghi; Shawna M Cutting; Morgan Hemendinger; Heather I Gale; Grayson L Baird; Richard A Haas; Mahesh V Jayaraman Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2016-12-16 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Daniel A Tonetti; Shashvat M Desai; Stephanie Casillo; Benjamin M Zussman; Ashutosh Jadhav; Brian Thomas Jankowitz; Tudor G Jovin; Bradley A Gross Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2019-04-10 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Waleed Brinjikji; Robert M Starke; M Hassan Murad; David Fiorella; Vitor M Pereira; Mayank Goyal; David F Kallmes Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2017-07-28 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Mayank Goyal; Bijoy K Menon; Wim H van Zwam; Diederik W J Dippel; Peter J Mitchell; Andrew M Demchuk; Antoni Dávalos; Charles B L M Majoie; Aad van der Lugt; Maria A de Miquel; Geoffrey A Donnan; Yvo B W E M Roos; Alain Bonafe; Reza Jahan; Hans-Christoph Diener; Lucie A van den Berg; Elad I Levy; Olvert A Berkhemer; Vitor M Pereira; Jeremy Rempel; Mònica Millán; Stephen M Davis; Daniel Roy; John Thornton; Luis San Román; Marc Ribó; Debbie Beumer; Bruce Stouch; Scott Brown; Bruce C V Campbell; Robert J van Oostenbrugge; Jeffrey L Saver; Michael D Hill; Tudor G Jovin Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-02-18 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Sara Protto; Niko Sillanpää; Juha-Pekka Pienimäki; Ira Matkaselkä; Janne Seppänen; Heikki Numminen Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2016-03-03 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Sang Hee Ha; Jae-Chan Ryu; Jae-Han Bae; Sujin Koo; Boseong Kwon; Yunsun Song; Deok Hee Lee; Jun Young Chang; Dong-Wha Kang; Sun U Kwon; Jong S Kim; Bum Joon Kim Journal: Neurol Sci Date: 2022-07-13 Impact factor: 3.830
Authors: David Hernández; Elena Serrano; Gemma Molins; Federico Zarco; Oscar Chirife; Mariano Werner; Blanca Lara; Anna Ramos; Laura Llull; Manuel Requena; Marta de Dios Las Cuevas; Sebastián Remollo; Carlos Piñana; Antonio López-Rueda Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 4.086