Key result
ACE68 catheter linked to ~67% higher odds of first-pass reperfusion vs ACE60.
Cohort (n=152)
No
Odds Ratio: 1.67 (95% CI 1.1–2.54)
Absolute Event Rate: 53% vs 33%
p-value: p=0.016
PURPOSE: To report the efficacy of A Direct Aspiration first-Pass Thrombectomy (ADAPT) technique with larger-bore ACE aspiration catheters as first-line treatment for anterior circulation emergent large vessel occlusions (ELVOs), and assess for the presence of a first-pass effect with ADAPT. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 152 consecutive patients with anterior circulation ELVOs treated with the ADAPT technique as first-line treatment using ACE60, 64, or 68 at our institution. Baseline characteristics, procedural variables, and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days were recorded. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients were treated with ACE60 (37.5%), 35 with ACE64 (23%), and 60 with ACE68 (39.5%). Median groin puncture to reperfusion time was 30 min with ACE60, 26 min with ACE64, and 19.5 min with ACE68. Successful reperfusion after the first ADAPT pass was 33% with ACE60 and 53% with ACE68 (P=0.04). The stent-retriever rescue rate was 26% with ACE60, 3% with ACE64, and 10% with ACE68 (P=0.004). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, use of the ACE68 aspiration catheter was an independent predictor of successful reperfusion after the first ADAPT pass (P=0.016, OR1.67, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.54), and successful reperfusion after the first ADAPT pass was an independent predictor of good clinical outcome at 90 days (P=0.0004, OR6.2, 95% CI 2.27 to 16.8). CONCLUSION: Use of the larger-bore ACE 68 aspiration catheter was associated with shorter groin puncture to reperfusion time, higher rate of successful reperfusion after the first ADAPT pass, and lower rate of stent-retriever rescue. Further, a first-pass effect was demonstrated in our ADAPT patient cohort.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Almandoz et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Anterior circulation emergent large vessel occlusions (ELVOs) (n=152). ACE68 aspiration catheter vs. ACE60 aspiration catheter was evaluated on Successful reperfusion after the first ADAPT pass (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.1-2.54, p=0.016). Use of the ACE68 aspiration catheter was an independent predictor of successful first-pass reperfusion compared to ACE60 (53% vs 33%; OR 1.67; 95% CI 1.1-2.54; P=0.016).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: