Literature DB >> 34280538

Comparison of Balloon Guide Catheters and Standard Guide Catheters for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

John M Pederson1, Natalie L Reierson2, Nicole Hardy3, Jillienne C Touchette2, Sammy Medam2, Averi Barrett2, Megan Schmidt2, Waleed Brinjikji4, David F Kallmes4, Kevin M Kallmes5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Balloon guide catheters (BGCs) are designed to induce flow arrest during mechanical thrombectomy procedures for acute ischemic stroke due to large-vessel occlusion and have been associated with improved clinical and angiographic outcomes. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the relative technical and clinical outcomes associated with BGC versus non-BGC approaches.
METHODS: A systematic review of clinical literature using the PubMed database was undertaken to identify multiarm studies published between 2010 and 2021 reporting the use of BGC versus non-BGC approaches for stroke treatment. Data collected included complete recanalization (thrombolysis in cerebral infarction, TICI), first-pass effect TICI 3, puncture-to recanalization time, number of endovascular attempts, distal embolization, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, 90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0-2, and 90-day mortality. Subgroup analyses assessed the impact of treatment device (stent-retrievers, contact aspiration, combination therapy, and not specified/other). A random effects model was fit for each outcome measure.
RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included. Compared with non-BGC approaches, patients treated with BGCs had greater odds of TICI 3 (odds ratio [OR] 1.57; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.08-2.29) and first-pass effect TICI 3 (OR 3.63; 95% CI 2.34-5.62), reduced puncture-to-revascularization time (mean difference -7.8; 95% CI -13.3 to -2.2), fewer endovascular attempts (mean difference -0.47; 95% CI -0.68 to -0.26), reduced odds of distal emboli (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.17-0.71) and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.51-0.86), greater odds of 90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0-2 (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.27-1.79), and reduced odds of mortality (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.57-0.82).
CONCLUSIONS: BGCs yield superior technical and clinical outcomes while reducing patient complications.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Balloon guide catheter; Endovascular procedures; Ischemic stroke; Mechanical thrombectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34280538     DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.07.034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World Neurosurg        ISSN: 1878-8750            Impact factor:   2.104


  4 in total

1.  Association of Stent-Retriever Characteristics in Establishing Successful Reperfusion During Mechanical Thrombectomy : Results from the ESCAPE-NA1 Trial.

Authors:  Petra Cimflova; Nishita Singh; Johanna M Ospel; Martha Marko; Nima Kashani; Arnuv Mayank; Ricardo Hanel; Diogo C Haussen; Aditya Bharatha; David Volders; Manraj K S Heran; Alexandre Y Poppe; Brian van Adel; Bijoy K Menon; Manish Joshi; Andrew Demchuk; Ryan McTaggart; Raul G Nogueira; Jeremy L Rempel; Charlotte Zerna; Michael Tymianski; Michael D Hill; Mayank Goyal; Mohammed A Almekhlafi
Journal:  Clin Neuroradiol       Date:  2022-01-07       Impact factor: 3.156

Review 2.  Mechanical Thrombectomy via Transradial Approach for Posterior Circulation Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Hassan Kobeissi; Sherief Ghozy; Michael Liu; Gautam Adusumilli; Cem Bilgin; Ramanathan Kadirvel; David F Kallmes; Waleed Brinjikji
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-07-05

3.  Mechanical Thrombectomy: Review.

Authors:  Chintan Prajapati; Vikram Huded; Niranjan Mahajan; Anirudh Kulkarni
Journal:  Ann Indian Acad Neurol       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 1.714

4.  Efficacy of Balloon Guide Catheter-Assisted Thrombus Repair in Stroke Treatment: A Retrospective Survey in China.

Authors:  Qiang Li; Tengfei Zhou; Yingkun He; Min Guan; Zhaoshuo Li; Liheng Wu; Changming Wen; Haibo Wang; Guang Feng; Ziliang Wang; Liangfu Zhu; Tianxiao Li
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2022-09-28       Impact factor: 3.246

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.