Different learning curves between stent retrieval and a direct aspiration first-pass technique for acute ischemic stroke

Stent retriever versus aspiration based thrombectomy: impact on first pass reperfusion, procedure time, and clinical outcomes in large vessel occlusion. Nationwide registry based cohort study

BACKGROUND

First pass reperfusion (FPR), defined as near complete reperfusion (extended Treatment in Cerebral Ischemia (eTICI) score 2c/3) in a single attempt without rescue therapy has been proposed as a quality metric. However, it remains unclear if the thrombectomy method influences clinical outcome and FPR rate. This study evaluates whether stent retriever and aspiration based thrombectomy differ in FPR rate, technical and clinical outcomes in FPR, and multiple pass reperfusion (MPR).

METHODS

This retrospective, nationwide, multicenter registry study included consecutive patients with proximal anterior or posterior circulation stroke, treated between 2018 and 2021 in Sweden. Outcome measures were FPR rate, procedure time, early neurological improvement (≥4 points on National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) or a score of 0-1 at 24 hours), favorable functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2 or no decline at 90 days), and mortality at 90 days.

RESULTS

Of 3309 patients (median age 75, median NIHSS 16), 1990 underwent stent retriever and 1319 aspiration based thrombectomy as the firstline method. No difference in FPR rate was observed. Aspiration based thrombectomy showed a shorter procedure time in the FPR group (crude OR (cOR) 6.4 min (95% CI 3.4 to 9.3), adjusted OR (aOR) 8.7 min (95% CI 1.8 to 15.6)) and MPR group (cOR 9.7 min (95% CI 4.0 to 15.4), aOR 17.4 min (95% CI 9.6 to 25.2)), and association with early neurological improvement (cOR 1.21 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.42), aOR 1.40 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.67)) and favorable functional outcome (aOR 1.22 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.47)).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that aspiration based thrombectomy was associated with a shorter procedure time and better clinical outcomes than treatment with a stent retriever. No difference was found in FPR rate.

Between-Center Variation in Outcome After Endovascular Treatment of Acute Stroke: Analysis of Two Nationwide Registries

BACKGROUND

Insight in differences in patient outcomes between endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) centers can help to improve stroke care. We assessed between-center variation in functional outcome of patients with acute ischemic stroke who were treated with EVT. We analyzed to what extent this variation may be explained by modifiable center characteristics.

METHODS

We used nationwide registry data of patients with stroke treated with EVT in the Netherlands and in the Czech Republic. Primary outcome was modified Rankin Scale score at 90 days as an indicator of disability. We used multilevel ordinal logistic regression to quantify the between-center variation in outcomes and the impact of patient and center characteristics. Between-center variation was expressed as the relative difference in odds of a more favorable modified Rankin Scale score between a relatively better performing center (75th percentile) and a relatively worse performing center (25th percentile).

RESULTS

We included a total of 4518 patients treated in 33 centers. Adjusted for patient characteristics, the odds of a more favorable outcome in a center at the 75th percentile of the outcome distribution were 1.46 times higher (95% CI, 1.31-1.70) than the odds in a center at the 25th percentile. Adjustment for center characteristics, including the median time between stroke onset and reperfusion per center, decreased this relative difference in odds to 1.30 (95% CI, 1.18-1.50, P=0.01). This translates into an absolute difference in likelihood of good functional outcome of 8% after adjustment for patient characteristics and to 5% after further adjustment for modifiable center characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The considerable between-center variation in patient outcomes after EVT for acute ischemic stroke could be largely explained by center-specific characteristics, such as time to reperfusion. Improvement of these parameters may likely result in a decrease in center-specific differences, and an overall improvement in outcome of patients with acute ischemic stroke.

Should the direct aspiration first pass technique be advocated over the stent-retriever technique for acute ischemic stroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis of 7692 patients

Background:

The present meta-analysis aimed to synthesize evidence from all published studies with head-to-head data on the outcomes of a direct aspiration first pass technique (ADAPT) and the stent-retriever (SR) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients.

Methods:

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to March 2021 for relevant clinical trials and observational studies. Eligible studies were identified, and all relevant outcomes were pooled in the meta-analysis random-effects model of DerSimonian-Laird.

Results:

Thirty studies were included in the meta-analysis with a total of 7868 patients. Compared with the SR, the ADAPT provides slightly higher rates of successful recanalization (RR 1.06, 95% CI [1.02 to 1.10]) and complete recanalization (RR 1.20, 95% CI [1.01 to 1.43]) but with more need for rescue therapy (RR 1.81, 95% CI [1.29 to 2.54]). There were no significant differences between the two techniques in terms of mortality at discharge, mortality at 90 days, change in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, the favorable outcome (modified Rankin scale (mRS) of 0-2), time to the groin puncture, or frequency of complications as intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), embolus in a new territory (ENT), hemorrhagic infarction, parenchymal hematoma, subarachnoid hemorrhage, or procedural complications (all P > 0.05).

Conclusion:

Current evidence supports the use of the ADAPT technique to achieve successful and complete recanalization while considering the higher need for rescue therapy in some patients.

TAB-TICI Score: Successful Recanalization Score After Endovascular Thrombectomy in Acute Stroke

Background and Purpose: Successful reperfusion therapy is supposed to be comprehensive and validated beyond the grade of recanalization. This study aimed to develop a novel scoring system for defining the successful recanalization after endovascular thrombectomy.

Methods: We analyzed the data of consecutive acute stroke patients who were eligible to undergo reperfusion therapy within 24 h of onset and who underwent mechanical thrombectomy using a nationwide multicenter stroke registry. A new score was produced using the predictors which were directly linked to the procedure to evaluate the performance of the thrombectomy procedure.

Results: In total, 446 patients in the training population and 222 patients in the validation population were analyzed. From the potential components of the score, four items were selected: Emergency Room-to-puncture time (T), adjuvant devices used (A), procedural intracranial bleeding (B), and post-thrombectomy reperfusion status [Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI)]. Using these items, the TAB-TICI score was developed, which showed good performance in terms of discriminating early neurological aggravation [AUC 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67–0.78, P < 0.01] and favorable outcomes (AUC 0.69, 95% CI 0.64–0.75, P < 0.01) in the training population. The stability of the TAB-TICI score was confirmed by external validation and sensitivity analyses. The TAB-TICI score and its derived grade of successful recanalization were significantly associated with the volume of thrombectomy cases at each site and in each admission year.

Conclusion: The TAB-TICI score is a valid and easy-to-use tool to more comprehensively define successful recanalization after endovascular thrombectomy in acute stroke patients with large vessel occlusion.

A direct aspiration first-pass technique (ADAPT) versus stent retriever for acute ischemic stroke (AIS): a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There is an ongoing debate about whether a direct aspiration first-pass technique (ADAPT) or stent retriever should be used as the first-pass mechanical thrombectomy device for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of ADAPT versus stent retriever in patients with AIS.

METHODS

Structured searches on the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were conducted through July 2020. The primary outcomes of this study were: successful and complete recanalization; excellent and favorable outcomes; all-cause mortality at 90 days; and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH). The secondary outcomes of this study were: successful recanalization by primary chosen device; additional therapy; occurrence of emboli in a new territory; hemorrhagic complication; hemorrhagic infarction; parenchymatous hematoma; and subarachnoid hemorrhage. The odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the primary and secondary outcomes were calculated using a random-effects model. I² statistics were used to assess the heterogeneity for each outcome among the included studies.

RESULTS

Finally, 20 studies with a total of 6311 patients were included in our meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between the ADAPT group and the stent retriever group of the primary and secondary outcomes except additional therapy. Our pooled results indicated that patients in the ADAPT group needed more additional therapy than those in the stent retriever group (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.41-3.57).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our meta-analysis showed similar clinical outcomes of ADAPT and stent retriever. However, patients in the ADAPT group had higher additional therapy rates than those in the stent retriever group. Due to several inevitable limitations of this meta-analysis, more large-scale randomized controlled trials are required to further investigate this topic.

Aspiration Thrombectomy Versus Stent Retriever Thrombectomy Alone for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of aspiration thrombectomy versus stent retriever thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Methods We queried online databases for original studies comparing aspiration thrombectomy with stent retriever thrombectomy in patients with AIS. After article selection, data were extracted on multiple baseline characteristics and prespecified endpoints. Dichotomous data were presented as risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs); continuous data as mean differences and 95% CIs. The data were pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis was conducted based on study type, site of occlusion, and age. Results We shortlisted nine relevant studies (n=1453 patients; n=690 receiving aspiration thrombectomy and n=763 receiving stent retriever thrombectomy). Meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference between the two groups in the rates of successful recanalization (RR: 0.96 [0.87, 1.06]; p=0.42), excellent functional outcome (RR: 0.90 [0.80, 1.01]; p=0.06), or procedure time (weighted mean difference (WMD): -5.39 minutes [-11.81, 1.04]; p=0.10). However, when removing the study by Nishi et al., sensitivity analysis resulted in a significant reduction in procedure time with aspiration (WMD: -11.01 [-15.54, -6.49]; p<0.0001). No significant difference was observed in safety outcomes, including all-cause mortality (RR: 0.82 [0.57, 1.19]; p=0.30), intracranial hemorrhage (RR: 0.93 [0.55, 1.59]; p=0.80), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (RR: 0.72[0.42, 1.21]; p=0.57), or embolization to new territory (RR: 0.71 [0.42, 1.19]; p=0.19). Subgroup analysis revealed that aspiration thrombectomy led to significantly better outcomes in patients with a mean age ≤65 (RR: 1.15 [1.03, 1.29]; p=0.001), and stent retriever thrombectomy led to increased recanalization success in patients with a mean age >65 (RR: 0.89 [0.80, 1.00]; p=0.05). Conclusions Our updated meta-analysis reveals that both aspiration and stent retriever thrombectomy are comparably effective in the management of AIS. Shorter procedure times may potentially be attained with aspiration thrombectomy, and outcomes with each procedure may be age-dependent.

Frontline contact aspiration thrombectomy using SOFIA catheter for acute ischemic stroke: period-to-period comparison with Penumbra catheter

BACKGROUND

Recent aspiration thrombectomy devices tend to have a more flexible distal tip and larger bore for easy target access and effective reperfusion. Here, this study primarily focused on the efficacy and safety of the SOFIA catheters when it was used as a frontline contact aspiration thrombectomy (CAT) tool for acute intracranial large vessel occlusion in comparison with the data from a period when the Penumbra catheter was used.

METHODS

The subjects comprised 189 patients who underwent CAT (90 with Penumbra Max family and 99 with SOFIA/SOFIA plus). Patients' data were retrospectively analyzed to evaluate overall clinical and angiographic outcomes and compared between the devices.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. But, intravenous alteplase was more frequently administered in the Penumbra group (43.3% vs. 29.3%, p = 0.045), while incidence of ICA occlusion was higher in SOFIA group (18.9% vs. 38.4%, p = 0.013). The modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 2b-3 of reperfusion was 94.4% for the Penumbra group and 92.9% for the SOFIA group (p = 0.656). The first-pass effect was more frequently achieved in the SOFIA group (20.0% vs. 39.4%, p = 0.004) and endovascular procedure time was significantly shorter (55.5 min vs. 36 min, p < 0.001). However, clinical outcomes did not differ significantly regarding mortality (11.1% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.213), hemorrhagic complications, and mRS 0-2 at 3 months (63.3% vs. 58.6%; p = 0.504).

CONCLUSION

CAT using SOFIA may be safe and comparable to thrombectomy using the Penumbra reperfusion catheter. And, the SOFIA catheter could be advantageous for rapid reperfusion and first-pass effect without any significant complications.

Outcomes of Stent Retriever versus Aspiration-First Thrombectomy in Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

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.