Clinical and procedural outcomes with or without balloon guide catheters during endovascular thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis with first-line technique subgroup analysis

21Citations
Citations of this article
35Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Balloon guide catheters are increasingly used to improve clot retrieval by temporarily stopping proximal blood flow during endovascular thrombectomy. PURPOSE: Our aim was to provide a summary of the literature comparing the procedural and clinical outcomes of endovascular thrombectomy with or without balloon guide catheters, depending on the first-line technique used. DATA SOURCES: We used PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. STUDY SELECTION: We chose studies that compared using balloon guide catheters with not using them. DATA ANALYSIS: Random effects meta-analysis was performed to compare the procedural outcomes measured as the first-pass effect, successful reperfusion, number of passes, procedural duration, arterial puncture to reperfusion time, distal emboli, and clinical outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: Overall, a meta-analysis of 16 studies (5507 patients, 50.8% treated with balloon guide catheters and 49.2% without them) shows that the use of balloon guide catheters increases the odds of achieving a first-pass effect (OR = 1.92; 95% CI, 1.34-2.76; P,.001), successful reperfusion (OR = 1.85; 95% CI, 1.42-2.40; P,.001), and good functional outcome (OR = 1.48; 95% CI, 1.27-1.73; P,.001). Balloon guide catheters reduce the number of passes (mean difference = -0.35; 95% CI, -0.65 to -0.04; P =.02), procedural time (mean difference = -19.73; 95% CI, -34.63 to -4.83; P =.009), incidence of distal or new territory emboli (OR = 0.5; 95% CI, 0.26-0.98; P =.04), and mortality (OR = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.62-0.85; P,.001). Similar benefits of balloon guide catheters are observed when the first-line technique was a stent retriever or contact aspiration, but not for a combined approach. LIMITATIONS: The analysis was based on nonrandomized trials with a moderate risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: Current literature suggests improved clinical and procedural outcomes associated with the use of balloon guide catheters during endovascular thrombectomy, especially when using the first-line stent retriever.

References Powered by Scopus

Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses

49145Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis

27100Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

ROBINS-I: A tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions

11824Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Effect of proximal blood flow arrest during endovascular thrombectomy (ProFATE): Study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

10Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Comparison of balloon guide catheter versus non-balloon guide catheter for mechanical thrombectomy in patients with distal medium vessel occlusion

9Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A propensity score-matched comparative study of balloon guide catheters versus conventional guide catheters for concurrent mechanical thrombectomy with carotid stenting in tandem strokes: Comparison of first pass effect, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and 90-day functional outcomes

7Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Podlasek, A., Dhillon, P. S., Jewett, G., Shahein, A., Goyal, M., & Almekhlafi, M. (2021, August 1). Clinical and procedural outcomes with or without balloon guide catheters during endovascular thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis with first-line technique subgroup analysis. American Journal of Neuroradiology. American Society of Neuroradiology. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A7164

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

Researcher 6

55%

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 5

45%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 11

79%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1

7%

Neuroscience 1

7%

Engineering 1

7%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free