Larger ACE 68 aspiration catheter increases first-pass efficacy of ADAPT technique
- PMID: 29970617
- DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-013957
Larger ACE 68 aspiration catheter increases first-pass efficacy of ADAPT technique
Abstract
Purpose: To report the efficacy of A Direct Aspiration first-Pass Thrombectomy (ADAPT) technique with larger-bore ACE aspiration catheters as first-line treatment for anterior circulation emergent large vessel occlusions (ELVOs), and assess for the presence of a first-pass effect with ADAPT.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 152 consecutive patients with anterior circulation ELVOs treated with the ADAPT technique as first-line treatment using ACE60, 64, or 68 at our institution. Baseline characteristics, procedural variables, and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days were recorded.
Results: Fifty-seven patients were treated with ACE60 (37.5%), 35 with ACE64 (23%), and 60 with ACE68 (39.5%). Median groin puncture to reperfusion time was 30 min with ACE60, 26 min with ACE64, and 19.5 min with ACE68. Successful reperfusion after the first ADAPT pass was 33% with ACE60 and 53% with ACE68 (P=0.04). The stent-retriever rescue rate was 26% with ACE60, 3% with ACE64, and 10% with ACE68 (P=0.004). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, use of the ACE68 aspiration catheter was an independent predictor of successful reperfusion after the first ADAPT pass (P=0.016, OR1.67, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.54), and successful reperfusion after the first ADAPT pass was an independent predictor of good clinical outcome at 90 days (P=0.0004, OR6.2, 95% CI 2.27 to 16.8).
Conclusion: Use of the larger-bore ACE 68 aspiration catheter was associated with shorter groin puncture to reperfusion time, higher rate of successful reperfusion after the first ADAPT pass, and lower rate of stent-retriever rescue. Further, a first-pass effect was demonstrated in our ADAPT patient cohort.
Keywords: catheter; intervention; stroke; thrombectomy.
© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2019. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interests: JEDA and YK are consultants for Penumbra, Inc., and Medtronic Neurovascular. All other authors do not have any competing interests related to the subject matter of this manuscript.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous