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.