Double solitaire mechanical thrombectomy in acute stroke: Effective rescue strategy for refractory artery occlusions?

38Citations
Citations of this article
52Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Mechanical thrombectomy by using a single stent retriever system has demonstrated high efficacy for recanalization of large-artery occlusions in acute stroke. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a novel double Solitaire stent retriever technique as an escalating treatment for occlusions that are refractory to first-line single stent retriever mechanical thrombectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients treated with the double stent retriever technique by using the Solitaire system were retrospectively selected from 2 large neurointerventional centers. Time to recanalization, angiographic (TICI) and clinical outcomes (mRS), and complications were assessed. RESULTS: Ten patients (median NIHSS score, 16; mean age, 70 years) with MCA M1 segment (n = 5) and terminal ICA (n = 5 including 2 ICA tandem) occlusions were included. Prior single stent retriever mechanical thrombectomy had been performed in 9 patients (median number of passes, 3). Median time to recanalization was 60 minutes (interquartile range, 45-87 minutes). Procedure-related complications occurred in 1 patient; overall mortality was 20%. Recanalization of the target vessel (TICI 2b/3) was achieved in 80%. Good clinical outcome (mRS 0-2) was 50%. CONCLUSIONS: In this preliminary feasibility study, the double Solitaire stent retriever technique proved to be an effective method for recanalization of anterior circulation large-artery occlusions refractory to standard stent retriever mechanical thrombectomy.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Klisch, J., Sychra, V., Strasilla, C., Taschner, C. A., Reinhard, M., Urbach, H., & Meckel, S. (2015). Double solitaire mechanical thrombectomy in acute stroke: Effective rescue strategy for refractory artery occlusions? American Journal of Neuroradiology, 36(3), 552–556. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4133

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free