TREVO and Capture LP have equal technical success rates in mechanical thrombectomy of proximal and distal anterior circulation occlusions.

PURPOSE: Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is a proven method to treat large vessel occlusions in acute anterior circulation stroke. We compared the technical, imaging, and clinical outcomes of MT performed with either TREVO or Capture LP devices. METHODS: There were 42 and 43 patients in the TREVO and Capture LP groups, respectively. Baseline variables, technical outcome (Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction, TICI), 24 hours imaging outcome, and 3-month clinical outcome (modified Rankin Scale, mRS) were prospectively recorded. The patients were stratified according to clot location, groups compared, and logistic regression models devised to study the effect of device selection on the clinical outcome. RESULTS: The technical success rates were equal in both proximal (internal carotid artery and proximal M1 segment) and distal occlusions (distal M1 and M2 segments). The proportion of TICI 2b or 3 was 96% and 87% with TREVO and 87% and 89% with Capture LP (p=0.25 and p=0.80, respectively). Device selection did not significantly predict good clinical outcome (mRS ≤2) in either proximal or distal occlusions. In multivariate analysis, selecting Capture LP borderline significantly increased the odds of an excellent outcome close to sixfold both in proximal and distal occlusions (OR 6.7, 95% CI 0.82 to 53.7, p=0.08 and OR 5.7, 95% CI 0.88 to 37.8, p=0.07, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: TREVO and Capture LP perform equally well in proximal and distal occlusions in the anterior circulation when technical and good clinical outcome are considered. Capture LP may have a small advantage in reaching mRS ≤1 at 3 months. However, this needs to be confirmed in a randomized study.

Stent Retriever Thrombectomy in Different Thrombus Locations of Anterior Cerebral Circulation.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is a safe and efficient treatment for acute ischemic stroke in patients with proximal anterior occlusion and large penumbra. We evaluated the technical and clinical success of MT in relation to the location of the occlusion (internal carotid artery, M1 and M2 segments of the middle cerebral artery). METHODS: We prospectively reviewed 130 patients of whom 105 met the inclusion criteria. Baseline clinical, procedural and imaging variables, technical outcome (TICI, thrombolysis in cerebral infarction), 24 h imaging outcome and three-month clinical outcome (mRS, modified Rankin Scale) were recorded. Differences between the groups were studied with statistical tests according to the type of the variable. RESULTS: There were 37, 46 and 22 patients in the internal carotid artery (ICA), M1 and M2 groups, respectively. TICI 2b or 3 was achieved in 92 cases (88 %) with a non-significant trend towards a better recanalization outcome in the ICA and M1 groups. Overall, 57 of the 105 patients (55 %) experienced favorable clinical outcome (mRS ≤ 2) with no significant differences between the groups. Excellent outcome (mRS ≤ 1) was seen in 40 patients (39 %) and there proportionally more patients with excellent outcome in the ICA and M1 groups (ICA: 44 %, M1: 41 %, M2: 23 % of patients, p = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: There were no statistically significant differences in the technical or clinical outcomes between the different sites of occlusion (ICA, M1 or M2). There was a non-significant trend towards achieving excellent clinical outcome (3-month mRS ≤ 1) more often and better recanalization results in the two more proximal locations.