Combined balloon guide catheter, aspiration catheter, and stent retriever technique versus balloon guide catheter and stent retriever alone technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of a combination of balloon guide catheter (BGC), aspiration catheter, and stent retriever in acute ischemic stroke thrombectomy has not been shown to be better than a stent retriever and BGC alone, but this may be due to a lack of power in these studies. We therefore performed a meta-analysis on this subject. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, Embase/Ovid, and the Cochrane Library from inception to October 20, 2021. Our primary outcomes were the rate of successful final reperfusion (Treatment in Cerebral Ischemia (TICI) 2c-3) and first pass effect (FPE, defined as TICI 2c-3 in a single pass). Secondary outcomes were 3 month functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2), mortality, procedural complications, embolic complications, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH). A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5,4, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 test. RESULTS: Of 1629 studies identified, five articles with 2091 patients were included. For the primary outcomes, FPE (44.9% vs 45.4%, OR 1.04 (95% CI 0.90 to 1.22), I2=57%) or final successful reperfusion (64.5% vs 68.6%, OR 0.98 (95% CI 0.81% to 1.20%), I2=85%) was similar between the combination technique and stent retriever only groups. However, the combination technique had significantly less rescue treatment (18.8% vs 26.9%; OR 0.70 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.91), I2=0%). This did not translate into significant differences in secondary outcomes in functional outcomes, mortality, emboli, complications, or SICH. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in successful reperfusion and FPE between the combined techniques and the stent retriever and BGC alone groups. Neither was there any difference in functional outcomes, complications, or mortality.

Bridging thrombolysis improves survival rates at 90 days compared with direct mechanical thrombectomy alone in acute ischemic stroke due to basilar artery occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 1096 patients.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is an effective treatment for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) from basilar artery occlusion (BAO). OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes of MT, with and without bridging intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), in acute BAO through a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature. METHODS: Systematic searches of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central were undertaken on August 1, 2022. Good functional outcome defined as 90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0-2 was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures were 90-day mortality, successful post-thrombectomy recanalization (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score ≥2b), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). RESULTS: Three studies reporting 1096 patients with BAO AIS were included in the meta-analysis. No significant differences in good functional outcome were detected between the two groups (RR=1.28 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.92); p=0.117). However, specifically patients with large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) benefited from bridging IVT (OR=2.52 (95% CI 1.51 to 4.22); p<0.001) with better functional outcomes. There was a significantly lower 90-day mortality rate for patients who underwent bridging IVT compared with MT alone (RR=0.70 (95% CI 0.62 to 0.80); p=0.008). No significant differences were detected in rates of post-treatment recanalization (RR=1.01 (95% CI 0.35 to 2.91); p=0.954), sICH (RR=0.96 (95% CI 0.66 to 1.42); p=0.724), and SAH (RR=0.93 (95% CI 0.31 to 2.83); p=0.563). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AIS due to BAO, bridging IVT was associated with lower mortality rates at 90 days, compared with direct MT. There were no improved functional outcomes or increased sICH or SAH between both arms, However, patients with LAA benefited from bridging IVT, with better functional outcomes.

Left ventricular systolic dysfunction is associated with poor functional outcomes after endovascular thrombectomy.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular thrombectomy (ET) has transformed acute ischemic stroke (AIS) therapy in patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO). Left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) decreases global cerebral blood flow and predisposes to hypoperfusion. We evaluated the relationship between LVSD, as measured by LV ejection fraction (LVEF), and clinical outcomes in patients with anterior cerebral circulation LVO who underwent ET. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective cohort study examined anterior circulation LVO AIS patients from six international stroke centers. LVSD was measured by assessment of the echocardiographic LVEF using Simpson's biplane method of discs according to international guidelines. LVSD was defined as LVEF <50%. The primary outcome was defined as a good functional outcome using a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) of 0-2 at 3 months. RESULTS: We included 440 AIS patients with LVO who underwent ET. On multivariate analyses, pre-existing diabetes mellitus (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.24 to 3.39;p=0.005), unsuccessful reperfusion (Treatment in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) grade 0-2a) status (OR 4.21, 95% CI 2.04 to 8.66; p<0.001) and LVSD (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.68; p=0.011) were independent predictors of poor functional outcomes at 3 months. On ordinal (shift) analyses, LVSD was associated with an unfavorable shift in the mRS outcomes (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.53; p<0.001) after adjusting for age and ischemic heart disease. CONCLUSION: Anterior circulation LVO AIS patients with LVSD have poorer outcomes after ET, suggesting the need to consider cardiac factors for ET, the degree of monitoring and prognostication post-procedure.

Thrombectomy using the EmboTrap device: core laboratory-assessed results in 201 consecutive patients in a real-world setting.

BACKGROUND: We studied patients treated with the EmboTrap revascularization device in a prospective registry which is core laboratory evaluated by physicians from external centers. The goal was to determine how the EmboTrap would perform under the everyday conditions of a high-volume stroke center. METHODS: We examined all patients with acute stroke treated with the Embotrap device from October 2013 to March 2017 in our center. Imaging parameters and times were adjudicated by core laboratory personnel blinded to clinical information, treating physician, and clinical outcomes. Clinical evaluation was performed by independent neurologists and entered in a national registry. Evaluated endpoints were: successful revascularization (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) 2b-3) and good clinical outcomes at 3 months (modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-2). RESULTS: 201 consecutive patients with a median NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score of 15 (range 2-30) were included. 170 patients (84.6%) achieved mTICI 2b-3 reperfusion. The median number of attempts was 2 (range 1-10) with 52.8% of the population achieving good functional outcomes (mRS 0-2) at 3 months. On univariate analysis, good functional outcome was associated with the number of attempts, puncture-to-reperfusion time, anterior circulation occlusion, and NIHSS score. On multivariate analysis, pre-treatment NIHSS (OR 0.845 per point, 95% CI 0.793 to 0.908, P<0.001) and puncture-to-reperfusion time (OR 0.9952 per min, 95% CI 0.9914 to 0.9975, P=0.023) were associated with good functional outcomes at 3 months. CONCLUSION: The Embotrap device has a high rate of successful reperfusion. Our core laboratory-audited single-center experience suggests the technical feasibility and safety of the Embotrap for first-line use in a real-world setting.