Logo Medical Science Monitor Basic Research

Call: 1.631.470.9640
Mon-Fri 10 am - 2 pm EST

Contact Us

Logo Medical Science Monitor Basic Research Logo Medical Science Monitor Basic Research Logo Medical Science Monitor Basic Research

22 December 2018 : Clinical Research  

Comparison of Mechanical Thrombectomy with Contact Aspiration, Stent Retriever, and Combined Procedures in Patients with Large-Vessel Occlusion in Acute Ischemic Stroke

Václav Procházka1ABCDEFG*, Tomas Jonszta1ADEF, Daniel Czerny1ABDEF, Jan Krajca1DE, Martin Roubec2ABCDF, Eva Hurtikova2BD, Rene Urbanec3BF, Dana Streitová34BE, Lubomir Pavliska5BCD, Adela Vrtkova67BCDEF

DOI: 10.12659/MSM.913458

Med Sci Monit 2018; 24: CLR9342-9353

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We investigated the properties and effects of 5 mechanical thrombectomy procedures in patients with acute ischemic stroke. The relationships between the type of procedure, the time required, the success of recanalization, and the clinical outcome were analyzed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective comparative analysis included 500 patients with acute ischemic stroke and large-vessel occlusion. We compared contact aspiration thrombectomy (ADAPT, n=100), stent retriever first line (SRFL, n=196), the Solumbra technique (n=64), mechanical thrombectomy plus stent implantation (n=81), and a combined procedure (n=59).

RESULTS: ADAPT provided shorter procedure (P<0.001) and recanalization times (P<0.001) than the other techniques. Better clinical outcome was achieved for ischemia in the anterior circulation than ischemia in the posterior fossa (P<0.001). Compared to the other techniques, patients treated with ADAPT procedure had increased odds of achieving better mTICI scores (P=0.002) and clinical outcome (NIHSS) after 7 days (P=0.003); patients treated with SRFL had increased odds of achieving better long-term clinical status (3M-mRS=0–2; P=0.040). Patients with SRFL and intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) had increased odds of better clinical status (3M-mRS=0–2; P=0.031) and decreased odds of death (P=0.005) compared to patients with SRFL without IVT. The other treatment approaches had no additional effect of IVT. Patients with SRFL with a mothership transfer had increased odds of achieving favorable clinical outcome (3M-mRS) compared to SRFL with the drip-and-ship transfer paradigm (P=0.015).

CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that ADAPT and SRFL provided significantly better outcomes compared to the other examined techniques. A mothership transfer and IVT administration contributed to the success of the SRFL approach.

Keywords: Stroke, Thrombectomy, Thrombolytic Therapy

0 Comments

Most Viewed Current Articles

13 Apr 2020 : Original article  

Outcome of 24 Weeks of Combined Schroth and Pilates Exercises on Cobb Angle, Angle of Trunk Rotation, Chest...

DOI :10.12659/MSMBR.920449

Med Sci Monit Basic Res 2020; 26:e920449

11 May 2020 : Original article  

Analysis of Psychological and Sleep Status and Exercise Rehabilitation of Front-Line Clinical Staff in the ...

DOI :10.12659/MSMBR.924085

Med Sci Monit Basic Res 2020; 26:e924085

05 Jan 2021 : Review article  

A Southeast Asian Perspective on the COVID-19 Pandemic: Hemoglobin E (HbE)-Trait Confers Resistance Against...

DOI :10.12659/MSMBR.929207

Med Sci Monit Basic Res 2021; 27:e929207

10 Aug 2020 : Clinical Research  

Effects of Cognitive Task Training on Dynamic Balance and Gait of Patients with Stroke: A Preliminary Rando...

DOI :10.12659/MSMBR.925264

Med Sci Monit Basic Res 2020; 26:e925264

Your Privacy

We use cookies to ensure the functionality of our website, to personalize content and advertising, to provide social media features, and to analyze our traffic. If you allow us to do so, we also inform our social media, advertising and analysis partners about your use of our website, You can decise for yourself which categories you you want to deny or allow. Please note that based on your settings not all functionalities of the site are available. View our privacy policy.

Medical Science Monitor Basic Research eISSN: 2325-4416
Medical Science Monitor Basic Research eISSN: 2325-4416