Touchette, Jillienne C.

Aim: Stent-retriever (SR) thrombectomy has demonstrated superior outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke compared with medical management alone, but differences among SRs remain unexplored. We conducted a Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis to compare outcomes between three SRs: EmboTrap ® , Solitaire™, and Trevo ® . Methods: We conducted a PRISMA-compliant Systematic Review among English-language studies published after 2014 in PubMed/MEDLINE that reported SRs in ≥25 patients. Functional and safety outcomes included 90-day modified Rankin scale (mRS 0-2), mortality, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and embolization to new territory (ENT). Recanalization outcomes included modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (mTICI) and first-pass recanalization (FPR). We used a random effects Meta-Analysis to compare outcomes; subgroup and outlier-influencer analysis were performed to explore heterogeneity. Results: Fifty-one articles comprising 9,804 patients were included. EmboTrap had statistically significantly higher rates of mRS 0-2 (57.4%) compared with Trevo (50.0%, p = 0.013) and Solitaire (45.3%, p < 0.001). Compared with Solitaire (20.4%), EmboTrap (11.2%, p < 0.001) and Trevo (14.5%, p = 0.018) had statistically significantly lower mortality. Compared with Solitaire (7.7%), EmboTrap (3.9%, p = 0.028) and Trevo (4.6%, p = 0.049) had statistically significantly lower rates of sICH. There were no significant differences in ENT rates across all three devices (6.0% for EmboTrap, 5.3% for Trevo, and 7.7% for Solitaire, p = 0.518). EmboTrap had numerically higher rates of recanalization; however, no statistically significant differences were found. Conclusion: The results of our Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis suggest that EmboTrap may be associated with significantly improved functional outcomes compared with Solitaire and Trevo. EmboTrap and Trevo may be associated with significantly lower rates of sICH and mortality compared with Solitaire. No significant differences in recanalization and ENT rates were found. These conclusions are tempered by limitations of the analysis including variations in thrombectomy techniques in the field, highlighting the need for multi-arm RCT studies comparing different SR devices to confirm our findings.

Background and aim The use of endoluminal flow diversion in bifurcation aneurysms has been questioned due to the potential for complications and lower occlusion rates. In this study we assessed outcomes of endovascular treatment of intracranial sidewall and bifurcation aneurysms with flow diverters Methods In July 2020, a literature search for all studies utilizing endoluminal flow diverter treatment for sidewall or bifurcation aneurysms was performed. Data were collected from studies that met our inclusion/exclusion criteria by two independent reviewers and confirmed by a third reviewer. Using random-effects meta-analysis the target outcomes including overall complications (hematoma, ischemic events, minor ischemic stroke, aneurysm rupture, side vessel occlusion, stenosis, thrombosis, transient ischemic stroke, and other complications), perioperative complications, and follow-up (long-term) aneurysm occlusion were intestigated. Results Overall, we included 35 studies with 1084 patients with 1208 aneurysms. Of these aneurysms, 654 (54.14%) and 554 (45.86%) were classified as sidewall and bifurcation aneurysm, respectively, based on aneurysm location. Sidewall aneurysms had a similar total complication rate (R) of 27.12% (95% CI, 16.56%–41.09%), compared with bifurcation aneurysms (R, 20.40%, 95% CI, 13.24%–30.08%) (p = 0.3527). Follow-up angiographic outcome showed comparable complete occlusion rates for sidewall aneurysms (R 69.49%; 95%CI, 62.41%–75.75%) and bifurcation aneurysms (R 73.99%; 95% CI, 65.05%–81.31%; p = 0.4328). Conclusions This meta-analysis of sidewall and bifurcation aneurysms treated with endoluminal flow diverters demonstrated no significant differences in complications or occlusion rates. These data provide new information that can be used as a benchmark for comparison with emerging devices for the treatment of bifurcation aneurysms.

Abstract Background (+)‐Epicatechin (EPI) induces mitochondrial biogenesis and antioxidant metabolism in muscle fibers and neurons. We aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of (+)‐EPI in pediatric subjects with Friedreich's ataxia (FRDA). Methods This was a phase II, open‐label, baseline‐controlled single‐center trial including 10 participants ages 10 to 22 with confirmed FA diagnosis. (+)‐EPI was administered orally at 75 mg/d for 24 weeks, with escalation to 150 mg/d at 12 weeks for subjects not showing improvement of neuromuscular, neurological or cardiac endpoints. Neurological endpoints were change from baseline in Friedreich's Ataxia Rating Scale (FARS) and 8‐m timed walk. Cardiac endpoints were changes from baseline in left ventricular (LV) structure and function by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and echocardiogram, changes in cardiac electrophysiology, and changes in biomarkers for heart failure and hypertrophy. Results Mean FARS/modified (m)FARS scores showed nonstatistically significant improvement by both group and individual analysis. FARS/mFARS scores improved in 5/9 subjects (56%), 8‐m walk in 3/9 (33%), 9‐peg hole test in 6/10 (60%). LV mass index by cardiac MRI was significantly reduced at 12 weeks ( P = .045), and was improved in 7/10 (70%) subjects at 24 weeks. Mean LV ejection fraction was increased at 24 weeks ( P = .008) compared to baseline. Mean maximal septal thickness by echocardiography was increased at 24 weeks ( P = .031). There were no serious adverse events. Conclusion (+)‐EPI was well tolerated over 24 weeks at up to 150 mg/d. Improvement was observed in cardiac structure and function in subset of subjects with FRDA without statistically significant improvement in primary neurological outcomes. Synopsis A (+)‐epicatechin showed improvement of cardiac function, nonsignificant reduction of FARS/mFARS scores, and sustained significant upregulation of muscle‐regeneration biomarker follistatin.