A propensity score-matched comparative study of balloon guide catheters versus conventional guide catheters for concurrent mechanical thrombectomy with carotid stenting in tandem strokes: comparison of first pass effect, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and 90-day functional outcomes

Radial artery access with a sheathless 0.087" inner diameter balloon guide catheter (Walrus) for neurointerventional procedures: Technique and clinical outcomes

INTRO

There is a growing preference among neurointerventionalists for transradial access (TRA) over transfemoral access (TFA) due to improved patient satisfaction, recovery time and reduced access site complication, but using balloon guide catheters (BGCs) in the radial artery remains a challenge. We report our experience in successfully using the 0.087" inner diameter Walrus BGC without a sheath via the radial artery for non-emergent neurointerventions.

OBJECTIVE

Describe the technique for safely accessing the radial artery using the sheathless Walrus balloon guide catheter.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of thirteen consecutive patients who underwent intervention with radial artery access with a sheathless Walrus BGC was performed.

RESULTS

All twelve procedures were performed successfully with no instances of conversion from TRA to TFA. There were no significant procedural or access site complications. The mean radial diameter was 2.51 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

The Walrus 0.087" ID BGC is an effective tool that can safely be used via the radial artery using a sheathless approach, which helps to maximize the size of the catheter that can be used. This is the first instance of our knowledge of this technique being utilized for neurointerventions and therefore could be used to expand the indications for TRA for a wider range of procedures.

Outcomes in acute carotid-related stroke eligible for mechanical reperfusion: SAFEGUARD-STROKE Registry

BACKGROUND

Carotid-related strokes (CRS) are largely unresponsive to intravenous thrombolysis and are often large and disabling. Little is known about contemporary CRS referral pathways and proportion of eligible patients who receive emergency mechanical reperfusion (EMR).

METHODS

Referral pathways, serial imaging, treatment data, and neurologic outcomes were evaluated in consecutive CRS patients presenting over 18 months in catchment area of a major carotid disease referral center with proximal-protected CAS expertise, on-site neurology, and stroke thrombectomy capability (Acute Stroke of CArotid Artery Bifurcation Origin Treated With Use oF the MicronEt-covered CGUARD Stent - SAFEGUARD-STROKE Registry; companion to SAFEGUARD-STROKE Study NCT05195658).

RESULTS

Of 101 EMR-eligible patients (31% i.v.-thrombolyzed, 39.5% women, age 39-89 years, 94.1% ASPECTS 9-10, 90.1% pre-stroke mRS 0-1), 57 (56.4%) were EMR-referred. Referrals were either endovascular (Comprehensive Stroke Centre, CSC, 21.0%; Stroke Thrombectomy-Capable CAS Centre, STCC, 70.2%) or to vascular surgery (VS, 1.8%), with >1 referral attempt in 7.0% patients (CSC/VS or VS/CSC or CSC/VS/STCC). Baseline clinical and imaging characteristics were not different between EMR-treated and EMR-untreated patients. EMR was delivered to 42.6% eligible patients (emergency carotid surgery 0%; STCC rejections 0%). On multivariable analysis, non-tandem CRS was a predictor of not getting referred for EMR (OR 0.36; 95%CI 0.14-0.93, P=0.03). Ninety-day neurologic status was profoundly better in EMR-treated patients; mRS 0-2 (83.7% vs. 34.5%); mRS 3-5 (11.6% vs. 53.4%), mRS 6 (4.6% vs. 12.1%); P<0.001 for all.

CONCLUSIONS

EMR-treatment substantially improves CRS neurologic outcomes but only a minority of EMR-eligible patients receive EMR. To increase the likelihood of brain-saving treatment, EMR-eligible stroke referral and management pathways, including those for CSC/VS-rejected patients, should involve stroke thrombectomy-capable centres with endovascular carotid treatment expertise.

Comparison of balloon guide catheter versus non-balloon guide catheter for mechanical thrombectomy in patients with distal medium vessel occlusion

BACKGROUND

Several studies have established the safety and efficacy of balloon guide catheters (BGCs) for large vessel occlusions. However, the utility of BGCs remains largely unexplored for distal medium vessel occlusions (DMVOs). In this study, we aim to compare the outcomes of BGC vs. Non-BGC in patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for DMVO.

METHOD

This retrospective study from the Stroke Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry (STAR) encompassed adult patients with acute anterior cerebral artery, posterior cerebral artery, and middle cerebral artery-M2-3-4 occlusions. Procedure times, safety, recanalization, and neurological outcomes were compared between the two groups, with subgroup analysis based on first-line thrombectomy techniques.

RESULTS

A total of 1508 patients were included, with 231 patients (15.3%) in the BGC group and 1277 patients (84.7%) in the non-BGC group. The BGC group had a lower modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) score ≥2C (43.2% vs 52.7%, P=0.01), longer time from puncture to intracranial access (15 vs 8 min, P<0.01), and from puncture to final recanalization (97 vs 34 min, P<0.01). In the Solumbra subgroup, the first pass effect (FPE) rate was lower in the BGC group (17.4% vs 30.7%, P=0.03). Regarding clinical outcomes, the BGC group had a lower rate of distal embolization (8.8% vs 14.9%, P=0.03).

CONCLUSION

Our study found that use of BGC in patients with DMVO was associated with lower mTICI scores, decreased FPE rates, reduced distal embolization, and longer procedure times.

Comparison of 4 mm-sized and 3 mm-sized Stent Retrievers in Mechanical Thrombectomy for M2 Occlusion

INTRODUCTION

A stent retriever (SR) is widely used in mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for M2 segment occlusion. However, the suitable size of SR in M2 occlusion remains unclear. Therefore, we aimed to compare 4 mm-sized SR with 3 mm-sized SR in M2 occlusion.

METHODS

Patients who underwent MT with SR for M2 occlusion were dichotomized into 4×20 mm SR and 3×20 mm SR groups. Then, 1:1 propensity score matching was performed. The M2 segment was divided into proximal and distal segments according to the occlusion site. Subgroup analysis was then performed for each cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 111 patients were enrolled, with 4×20 mm SR and 3×20 mm SR applied in 72 (64.9%) and 39 (35.1%) cases, respectively. In propensity score matching, mean number of stent passages for reperfusion was significantly lower in the 4×20 mm SR group than in the 3×20 mm SR group (1.5 ± 0.8 vs. 2.1 ± 1.1; p = 0.004). First-pass reperfusion (FPR) was more highly achieved in the 4×20 mm SR group than in the 3×20 mm SR group (52.6% vs. 42.1%; p = 0.007). In both proximal and distal occlusion cohorts, the 4 mm SR group showed lower mean number of SR passage (p = 0.004 and p = 0.003, respectively) and higher FPR rate than the 3 mm SR group (p = 0.003 and p = 0.007, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In MT for M2 occlusion, 4×20 mm SR enables an effective procedure with lesser SR passage for reperfusion and a higher rate of FPR than 3×20 mm SR.