Stent-Based Retrieval Techniques in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients with and Without Susceptibility Vessel Sign.

Background and Purpose: Randomized controlled trials have challenged the assumption that reperfusion success after mechanical thrombectomy varies depending on the retrieval techniques applied; however, recent analyses have suggested that acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients showing susceptibility vessel sign (SVS) may respond differently. We aimed to compare different stent retriever (SR)-based thrombectomy techniques with respect to interventional outcome parameters depending on SVS status.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 497 patients treated with SR-based thrombectomy for anterior circulation AIS. Imaging was conducted using a 1.5 T or 3 T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner. Logistic regression analyses were performed to test for the interaction of SVS status and first-line retrieval technique. Results are shown as percentages, total values or adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
Results: An SVS was present in 87.9% (n = 437) of patients. First-line SR thrombectomy was used to treat 293 patients, whereas 204 patients were treated with a combined approach (COA) of SR and distal aspiration. An additional balloon-guide catheter (BGC) was used in 273 SR-treated (93.2%) and 89 COA-treated (43.6%) patients. On logistic regression analysis, the interaction variable of SVS status and first-line retrieval technique was not associated with first-pass reperfusion (aOR 1.736, 95% CI 0.491-6.136; p = 0.392), overall reperfusion (aOR 3.173, 95% CI 0.752-13.387; p = 0.116), periinterventional complications, embolization into new territories, or symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage. The use of BGC did not affect the results.
Conclusion: While previous analyses indicated that first-line SR thrombectomy may promise higher rates of reperfusion than contact aspiration in AIS patients with SVS, our data show no superiority of any particular SR-based retrieval technique regardless of SVS status.
(© 2021. The Author(s).)