Introduction The rate of first-attempt recanalization (FAR) with the newer-generation thrombectomy devices, and more specifically with aspiration devices, is not well known. Moreover, the effect of FAR on outcomes after mechanical thrombectomy is not properly understood.
Objective To report the rate of FAR using a direct aspiration first pass technique (ADAPT), investigate the association between FAR and outcomes, and identify the predictors of FAR.
Methods The ADAPT database was used to identify a subgroup of patients in whom FAR was achieved. Baseline characteristics, procedural, and postprocedural variables were collected. Outcome measures included 90-day modified Rankin scale (mRS) score, mortality, and hemorrhagic complications. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify FAR predictors.
Results A total of 524 patients was included of whom 178 (34.0%) achieved FAR. More patients in the FAR group than in the non-FAR group received IV tPA (46.6% vs 37.6%; p<0.05). For the functional outcome, higher proportions of patients in the FAR group achieved functional independence (mRS score 0–2; 53% vs 37%; p<0.05). Additionally, we observed lower mortality and hemorrhagic transformation rates in the FAR group than the non-FAR group. Independent predictors of FAR in the anterior circulation were pretreatment IV tPA, non-tandem occlusion, and use of larger reperfusion catheters (Penumbra, ACE 64–68). Independent predictors of FAR in the posterior circulation were diabetes, onset-to-groin time, and cardioembolic etiology.
Conclusion FAR was associated with better functional outcome and lower mortality rate. When ADAPT is used, a larger aspiration catheter and pretreatment IV tPA should be employed when indicated.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors All authors have provided a substantial contribution to the conception and design of the studies and/or the acquisition and/or the analysis of the data and/or the interpretation of the data. They have drafted the work or revised it for significant intellectual content and approved the final version of the manuscript. They agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work, including its accuracy and integrity.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests AS: consulting-Penumbra, Minnetronix, Cerenovus. AT: consulting-Codman, Penumbra, Microvention, Blockade, Pulsar Vascular, Medtronic, Siemens; research grants- Codman, Penumbra, Microvention, Pulsar Vascular, Medtronic Stock- Pulsar Vascular, Blockade. The remaining authors report no disclosure.
Patient consent Not required.
Ethics approval Medical University of South Carolina institutional review board.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data sharing statement Additional data from this project can be acquired by contacting the corresponding author.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.