These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Direct Aspiration versus Stent Retriever Thrombectomy for Acute Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in 9127 Patients.
    Author: Primiani CT, Vicente AC, Brannick MT, Turk AS, Mocco J, Levy EI, Siddiqui AH, Mokin M.
    Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis; 2019 May; 28(5):1329-1337. PubMed ID: 30772159.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The two most common approaches to thrombectomy of emergent large vessel occlusion (direct aspiration and primary stent retriever thrombectomy) have been extensively studied; however, the detailed benefit and risk comparison is largely unknown. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare radiographic and clinical outcomes between the use of primary stent retrievers and direct aspiration in management of acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: PubMed database was searched for studies between September 1, 2012 and December 31, 2017 with acute ischemic stroke patients. RESULTS: We identified 64 studies with 6875 patients in the primary stent retriever group and 25 studies with 2252 patients in the aspiration group. Primary aspiration alone, without the need of rescue stent retriever devices within the aspiration cohort, was performed in 65% of 2252 patients. There was no difference in the distribution of emergent large vessel occlusion based on occlusion site, age, baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, or the use of intravenous tPA (P = .19, .051, .23, and .093, respectively). Successful recanalization rates, defined as thrombolysis in cerebral Infarction 2b/3, were significantly higher in the aspiration group than the primary stent retriever group (89% versus 80%, P < .0001). No significant difference in good clinical outcome, defined as modified Rankin scale 0-2 (aspiration 52% versus stent 48%, P = .13), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (aspiration 5.6% versus stent 7.2%, P = .07), and mortality at 3 months (aspiration 15% versus stent 19%, P = .10). CONCLUSIONS: Both aspiration-first (including the subsequent use of stent retriever) and primary stent retriever thrombectomy approaches are equally effective in achieving good clinical outcomes. Our study suggests that direct aspiration with or without subsequent use of stent retriever is a safe and effective alternative to primary stent retriever in acute ischemic stroke.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]