INTRODUCTION: Various large-bore catheters can be employed for manual aspiration thrombectomy (MAT); clinical differences are rarely explored. METHODS: Prospectively collected demographic, angiographic, and clinical data for patients with acute internal carotid artery, middle cerebral artery M1, or basilar occlusions undergoing MAT over 23 months at a comprehensive stroke center were reviewed. We excluded patients in stentriever-based randomized trials/registries. The four most commonly utilized aspiration catheters were analyzed, and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the effect of primary aspiration catheter choice on first-pass success, final reperfusion, and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days. RESULTS: Of 464 large vessel thrombectomies, 180 were performed via MAT on the first pass with one of four catheters. First-pass success was achieved in 42% of cases overall; this rate did not differ significantly between catheters: 50% for Sofia, 45% for CAT6, 40% for 0.072 inch Navien, and 36% for ACE68, p=0.67. Final Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction 2b or 3 reperfusion was achieved in 94% of cases overall: 97% of cases with CAT6, 95% with Sofia, 92% with Navien, and 92% with ACE68, p=0.70. Mean number of passes for index thrombus (2.0 overall), median procedure time (32 min overall), 90-day good outcome (mRS 0-2, mean 36%), and 90-day mortality (mean 27%) did not differ significantly between patients treated with different initial catheters. CONCLUSION: Among large-bore aspiration catheters, catheter selection is not an independent predictor of first-pass success, final reperfusion, or clinical outcome.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tonetti et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: