A Direct Aspiration, First Pass Technique (ADAPT) versus Stent Retrievers for Acute Stroke Therapy: An Observational Comparative Study.

Details

Serval ID
serval:BIB_7E86DB3578BF
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Title
A Direct Aspiration, First Pass Technique (ADAPT) versus Stent Retrievers for Acute Stroke Therapy: An Observational Comparative Study.
Journal
AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology
Author(s)
Lapergue B., Blanc R., Guedin P., Decroix J.P., Labreuche J., Preda C., Bartolini B., Coskun O., Redjem H., Mazighi M., Bourdain F., Rodesch G., Piotin M.
ISSN
1936-959X (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0195-6108
Publication state
Published
Issued date
10/2016
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
37
Number
10
Pages
1860-1865
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article

Abstract
Mechanical thrombectomy with stent retrievers is now the standard therapy for selected patients with ischemic stroke. The technique of A Direct Aspiration, First Pass Technique for the Endovascular Treatment of Stroke (ADAPT) appears promising with a high rate of recanalization. We compared ADAPT versus stent retrievers (the Solitaire device) for efficacy and safety as a front-line endovascular procedure.
We analyzed 243 consecutive patients with large intracranial artery occlusions of the anterior circulation, treated within 6 hours with mechanical thrombectomy by either ADAPT or the Solitaire stent. Th primary outcome was complete recanalization (modified TICI ≥ 2b); secondary outcomes included complication rates and procedural and clinical outcomes.
From November 2012 to June 2014, 119 patients were treated with stent retriever (Solitaire FR) and 124 by using the ADAPT with Penumbra reperfusion catheters. The median baseline NIHSS score was the same for both groups (Solitaire, 17 [interquartile range, 11-21] versus ADAPT, 17 [interquartile range, 12-21]). Time from groin puncture to recanalization (Solitaire, 50 minutes [range, 25-80 minutes] versus ADAPT, 45 minutes [range, 27-70 minutes], P = .42) did not differ significantly. However, compared with the Solitaire group, patients treated with ADAPT achieved higher final recanalization rates (82.3% versus 68.9%; adjusted relative risk, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.02-1.37; P = .022), though differences in clinical outcomes between the cohorts were not significant. Use of an adjunctive device was more frequent in the ADAPT group (45.2% versus 13.5%, P < .0001). The rate of embolization in new territories or symptomatic hemorrhage did not differ significantly between the 2 groups.
Front-line ADAPT achieved higher recanalization rates than the Solitaire device. Further randomized controlled trials are warranted to define the best strategy for mechanical thrombectomy.

Pubmed
Create date
10/05/2017 15:52
Last modification date
20/08/2019 15:39
Usage data