Naoki Kaneko1, Mahsa Ghovvati2, Yutaro Komuro3, Lea Guo1, Kasra Khatibi1, Lucido L Ponce Mejia1, Hamidreza Saber1, Nasim Annabi2, Satoshi Tateshima1. 1. Department of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA. 2. Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering Department, University of California, Los Angeles, USA. 3. Department of Neurology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Fragile soft clots and stiff clots remain challenging in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. This study aims to investigate the impact of clot stiffness on the efficacy of thrombectomy devices and a new aspiration catheter with a hydro-separator. METHODS: The Neurostar aspiration catheter has a novel hydro-separator technology that macerates clots by a stream of saline inside the catheter. The Neurostar catheter and two commercially available devices, the SOFIA aspiration catheter and Solitaire stent retriever, were tested in this study. We evaluated the efficacy of each device on clots with various stiffness in a simple in vitro model. We also assessed single-pass recanalization performance in challenging situations with large erythrocyte-rich clots and fibrin-rich clots in a realistic vascular model. RESULTS: We observed an inverse association between the clot stiffness and recanalization rates. The aspiration catheter, SOFIA ingested soft clots but not moderately stiff clots. When removing soft clots with the stent retriever, fragmentation was observed, although relatively stiff clots were well-integrated and removed. The Neurostar ingested soft clots similar to the aspiration catheter, and also aspirated stiff clots by continuous suction with hydro-separator. In the experiments with challenging clots, the Neurostar led to significantly higher recanalization rates than the stent retriever and aspiration catheter. CONCLUSIONS: The stiffness of the clots affected the efficacy of endovascular thrombectomy based on the type of device. The Neurostar catheter with hydro-separator resulted in better success rates than a commercially available aspiration catheter and stent retriever in this experimental model.
OBJECTIVE: Fragile soft clots and stiff clots remain challenging in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. This study aims to investigate the impact of clot stiffness on the efficacy of thrombectomy devices and a new aspiration catheter with a hydro-separator. METHODS: The Neurostar aspiration catheter has a novel hydro-separator technology that macerates clots by a stream of saline inside the catheter. The Neurostar catheter and two commercially available devices, the SOFIA aspiration catheter and Solitaire stent retriever, were tested in this study. We evaluated the efficacy of each device on clots with various stiffness in a simple in vitro model. We also assessed single-pass recanalization performance in challenging situations with large erythrocyte-rich clots and fibrin-rich clots in a realistic vascular model. RESULTS: We observed an inverse association between the clot stiffness and recanalization rates. The aspiration catheter, SOFIA ingested soft clots but not moderately stiff clots. When removing soft clots with the stent retriever, fragmentation was observed, although relatively stiff clots were well-integrated and removed. The Neurostar ingested soft clots similar to the aspiration catheter, and also aspirated stiff clots by continuous suction with hydro-separator. In the experiments with challenging clots, the Neurostar led to significantly higher recanalization rates than the stent retriever and aspiration catheter. CONCLUSIONS: The stiffness of the clots affected the efficacy of endovascular thrombectomy based on the type of device. The Neurostar catheter with hydro-separator resulted in better success rates than a commercially available aspiration catheter and stent retriever in this experimental model.
Entities:
Keywords:
Acute ischemic stroke; aspiration; clot stiffness; endovascular thrombectomy; in vitro model
Authors: Gillian M Gunning; Kevin McArdle; Mahmood Mirza; Sharon Duffy; Michael Gilvarry; Patrick A Brouwer Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2017-01-02 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Sarah Johnson; Juyu Chueh; Matthew J Gounis; Ray McCarthy; J Patrick McGarry; Peter E McHugh; Michael Gilvarry Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2019-11-28 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Andrew Douglas; Seán Fitzgerald; Oana Madalina Mereuta; Rosanna Rossi; Sean O'Leary; Abhay Pandit; Ray McCarthy; Michael Gilvarry; Lukas Holmegaard; Margareta Abrahamsson; Mikael Jerndal; Niclas Dehlfors; Paul Brennan; Sarah Power; Alan O'Hare; Emma Griffin; David F Kallmes; Waleed Brinjikji; István Szikora; Turgut Tatlisumak; Alexandros Rentzos; John Thornton; Karen Doyle Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2019-11-04 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Vernard S Fennell; Swetadri Vasan Setlur Nagesh; Karen M Meess; Liza Gutierrez; Rhys H James; Michael E Springer; Adnan H Siddiqui Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2018-01-19 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Aquilla S Turk; Adnan Siddiqui; Johanna T Fifi; Reade A De Leacy; David J Fiorella; Eugene Gu; Elad I Levy; Kenneth V Snyder; Ricardo A Hanel; Amin Aghaebrahim; B Keith Woodward; Harry R Hixson; Mohammad I Chaudry; Alejandro M Spiotta; Ansaar T Rai; Donald Frei; Josser E Delgado Almandoz; Mike Kelly; Adam Arthur; Blaise Baxter; Joey English; Italo Linfante; Kyle M Fargen; J Mocco Journal: Lancet Date: 2019-03-09 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Christian Maegerlein; Benjamin Friedrich; Maria Berndt; Kristin Elizabeth Lucia; Lucas Schirmer; Holger Poppert; Claus Zimmer; Jaroslav Pelisek; Tobias Boeckh-Behrens; Johannes Kaesmacher Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2017-10-23 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: Nasim Annabi; Yi-Nan Zhang; Alexander Assmann; Ehsan Shirzaei Sani; George Cheng; Antonio D Lassaletta; Andrea Vegh; Bijan Dehghani; Guillermo U Ruiz-Esparza; Xichi Wang; Sidhu Gangadharan; Anthony S Weiss; Ali Khademhosseini Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2017-10-04 Impact factor: 17.956