Contact aspiration versus stent-retriever thrombectomy for distal middle cerebral artery occlusions in acute ischemic stroke: meta-analysis

Phan, Kevin, Maingard, Julian, Kok, Hong Kuan, Dmytriw, Adam A., Goyal, Sourabh, Chandra, Ronil, Brooks, Duncan M., Thijs, Vincent and Asadi, Hamed 2018, Contact aspiration versus stent-retriever thrombectomy for distal middle cerebral artery occlusions in acute ischemic stroke: meta-analysis, Neurointervention, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 100-109, doi: 10.5469/neuroint.2018.00997.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Contact aspiration versus stent-retriever thrombectomy for distal middle cerebral artery occlusions in acute ischemic stroke: meta-analysis
Author(s) Phan, Kevin
Maingard, Julian
Kok, Hong Kuan
Dmytriw, Adam A.
Goyal, Sourabh
Chandra, Ronil
Brooks, Duncan M.
Thijs, Vincent
Asadi, HamedORCID iD for Asadi, Hamed orcid.org/0000-0003-2475-9727
Journal name Neurointervention
Volume number 13
Issue number 2
Start page 100
End page 109
Total pages 10
Publisher Korean Society of Interventional Neuroradiology
Place of publication Seoul, South Korea
Publication date 2018-09
ISSN 2093-9043
Keyword(s) Cerebrovascular disorders
Endovascular procedures
Ischemia
Middle cerebral artery
Stroke
Thrombectomy
Summary PURPOSE: The evidence for endovascular therapy and choice of technique in distal middle cerebral artery (MCA) M2 segment occlusions in acute ischemic stroke remains controversial. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis primarily comparing reperfusion rates of stent-retrieval versus contact aspiration for M2 occlusions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study selection included cohorts of patients with distal MCA occlusions in acute ischemic strokes treated with an endovascular approach including stent-retrieval or contact aspiration. Twelve studies were selected for meta-analysis for a total of 835 cases. Meta-analysis by proportions was conducted on parameters including baseline and procedural characteristics, thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (TICI) 2b-3 outcomes, and 90-day modified Rankin scale (mRS) outcomes. RESULTS: Hypertension and hyperlipidemia were more prevalent in stent-retriever patients. Pooled baseline National Institute of Health Stroke Scale scores and Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score imaging scores were similar. Pooled time onset of symptoms to door arrival was higher for the stent-retrieval group (154 vs. 97.4 minutes, P=0.01), as was time to groin puncture (259.9 vs. 156.2 minutes, P=0.02), but there was no difference in procedure time. The TICI 2b-3 recanalization rate was similar (80.5% vs. 86.8%, P=0.168). The frequency of mRS 0-2 at 90-day was also similar (74.5% vs. 59.9%, P=0.120), and an excellent mRS 0-1 was lower for stent-retrievers (39.9% vs. 65.6%, P=0.003). A significant negative correlation was found between onset to groin puncture time and the proportion of patients with a good mRS (r=-0.71, P=0.048). CONCLUSION: Both endovascular techniques achieved recanalization rates greater than 80% and 90-day outcomes of minimal disability with similar complication rates. The literature is skewed by aspiration cases being performed sooner after onset of stroke compared to stent-retriever cases.
Language eng
DOI 10.5469/neuroint.2018.00997
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Copyright notice ©2018, Korean Society of Interventional Neuroradiology
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30115638

Document type: Journal Article
Collections: School of Medicine
Open Access Checking
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 7 Abstract Views, 1 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Tue, 27 Nov 2018, 09:21:39 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.