Responses

Download PDFPDF
Original research
Continuous aspiration prior to intracranial vascular embolectomy (CAPTIVE): a technique which improves outcomes
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    ‘Continuous’ vs. continuous
    • Marios Psychogios, Interventional Neuroradiologist University Medical Center Goettingen
    • Other Contributors:
      • Anastasios Mpotsaris, Interventional Neuroradiologist

    To the Editor:

    We read with great interest the article by McTaggart et al. on the new embolectomy technique called Continuous Aspiration Prior To Intracranial Vascular Embolectomy (CAPTIVE).(1) The paper adds information on the supporting evidence that a combined approach of stentretriever and aspiration-catheter utilization may be the optimal path in achieving higher rates of complete reperfusion in patients with large vessel occlusions.(2, 3) While the idea of starting aspiration with the intermediate catheter prior to and during the stentretriever placement is intriguing, attention has to be paid on the effect of prolonged aspiration on collateral flow, as reported in a recent JNIS publication.(4) Additionally, the ‘continuous’ part of the title may be misleading, as the authors state that they advance the aspiration-catheter towards the face of the clot until the drip rate has stopped. As seen in Fig 1E of the CAPTIVE publication, the tip of the aspiration-catheter becomes clogged with clot as ‘a portion is held captive within the distal aspiration catheter.’ This probably results in vacuum within the aspiration-catheter and non-existent aspiration in the vicinity of the aspiration-catheter tip during immobilization of the stentretriever/clot/aspiration-catheter unit. At last, the authors describe thoroughly a ‘De-CAPTIVE shear’ on Fig 2 but neglect to acknowledge that the same danger of clot-shearing applies to the moments of stentretriever/clot/aspiration-cath...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Interest of a balloon guide catheter in association with the CAPTIVE technique
    • Jildaz CAROFF, Neuroradiologist Interventional Neuroradiology, Hôpital Bicêtre, AP-HP, Paris
    • Other Contributors:
      • Valerio DA ROS, Neuroradiologist
      • Jonhatan CORTESE, Neuroradiologist
      • Simon ESCALARD, Neuroradiologist
      • Marta IACOBUCCI, Neuroradiologist
      • Christian DENIER, Neurologist
      • Laurent SPELLE, Neuroradiologist

    We have read with great interest the article describing the CAPTIVE technique for endovascular acute ischemic treatment by McTaggart et al.1. Firstly, we would like to commend the great clarity they used to describe the combination of distal aspiration and stent retriever to perform mechanical thrombectomy. Notably, they illustrated the rationale for aspiration prior to stent deployment as well as the removal of both distal aspiration catheter and stent as a single unit to decrease possible clot fragmentation.
    We adopt a very similar approach for most of our cases, although we would like to emphasize a slight variant that appears clinically interesting.

    In combination with stent retrievers, the balloon guide catheter (BGC) has been shown to improve the effectiveness of mechanical thrombectomy2, 3. In our experience, we typically use the CAPTIVE technique in association with a BGC which presents several potential advantages.
    Firstly, in cases of tortuous anatomy it provides excellent support for navigating the distal aspiration catheter. In addition, the balloon can be temporarily inflated at this stage to provide an anchoring effect in order to avoid potential push back of the guiding catheter4.
    Secondly, McTaggart et al. reported 5% embolization to new territory with the CAPTIVE technique; an equivalent rate to previous reports on distal aspiration with no stent retriever5. In an in vitro study, Chueh et al.6 demonstrated a significant decrease o...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.