Yoshimura, Shinichi

Background Randomized trials have shown equivocal outcomes between a direct aspiration as first-pass technique (ADAPT) and stent retriever (SR) stroke thrombectomy, yet whether specific patient subgroups benefit differentially from one technique over the other remains unknown. Methods In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, patients with large vessel occlusion were included, and those who underwent ADAPT versus SR first-pass thrombectomy (either as standalone or combined with aspiration) were compared. The primary outcome was a composite of first-pass effect (FPE, modified Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) 2c or better with one attempt) with no symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). A causal forest model was used to estimate the conditional average treatment effect (CATE) for each patient, with larger CATEs indicating that ADAPT is expected to be more advantageous. Patients were stratified by CATEs, and outcomes were compared between treatment groups. Results Among 6700 included patients, ADAPT (n=3695, 55%) was associated with a higher rate of FPE with no sICH (39.9% vs 26.9%; adjusted OR (aOR) 2.07, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.41, P<0.001). The causal forest identified significant treatment effect heterogeneity (interaction P<0.001), where ADAPT was more advantageous in more recent years and among patients with M1 occlusions presenting in earlier time windows. Low-CATE patients showed no statistically significant difference between techniques (aOR 0.91, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.45, P=0.70), while medium- and high-CATE patients demonstrated progressively larger ADAPT advantages (aOR 2.06, 95% CI 1.67 to 2.55, and aOR 2.99, 95% CI 2.24 to 3.98, respectively, both P<0.001). Conclusions ADAPT may be superior to SR for a majority of patients, particularly in recent years, and among patients with M1 occlusions presenting in earlier time windows.

Background Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) has transformed acute ischemic stroke (AIS) care, with onset-to-puncture (OTP) time widely recognized as a critical determinant of outcome. However, emerging evidence suggests that in-hospital procedure time (PT)—from arterial puncture to final recanalization—may have an equally or more significant impact. This study examines the relative contribution of PT versus OTP to functional outcomes in patients with AIS undergoing EVT. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted of 6644 patients with AIS treated at 44 international stroke centers from the Stroke Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry (STAR; 2016–2023). Multivariable regression, time-equivalence analysis, and marginal effects modeling were used to assess associations between PT, OTP, and 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) outcomes. Centers were stratified by procedural efficiency and compared using propensity score matching (PSM). Mediation analysis evaluated whether PT accounted for inter-center differences. Results PT and OTP were independently associated with functional outcomes; however, PT had a significantly stronger effect (adjusted OR for mRS 0–2: PT=0.56 vs OTP=0.96 per hour). Each 5 min increase in PT was equivalent to 78–100 min of additional OTP in outcome impact. Centers with faster average PT had higher rates of functional independence (number needed to treat (NNT)=10), fewer complications, and lower symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage rates. PT significantly mediated the relationship between center tier and outcomes (Sobel’s P<0.001). Conclusion While minimizing OTP remains important, PT exerts a greater influence on outcomes after EVT. Procedural efficiency should be emphasized in stroke systems of care and included in center performance metrics to improve patient outcomes.

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.