SOFIA catheter for direct aspiration of large vessel occlusion stroke: A single-center cohort and meta-analysis.
ADAPT
SOFIA
Thrombectomy
aspiration
ischemic stroke
Journal
Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences
ISSN: 2385-2011
Titre abrégé: Interv Neuroradiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9602695
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2021
Dec 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
6
4
2021
medline:
15
12
2021
entrez:
5
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Direct aspiration (DA) using large-bore distal aspiration catheters is an established strategy for the endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) of large-vessel occlusion stroke (LVOS). However, the performance of individual catheters like SOFIA has yet to be examined. We present a cohort of 144 consecutive patients treated with first-line DA and SOFIA 6 F Plus catheter for LVOS. We also conducted a systematic review of the literature searching multiple databases for reports on thrombectomy with DA and SOFIA catheters and performed a meta-analysis of recanalization, safety, and clinical outcomes. In the study cohort a successful recanalization (mTICI 2b-3) rate of 75.7% was achieved with DA alone, the global rate for functional independence (90-day mRS 0-2) was 40.3%. For the metanalysis we selected nine articles that included a total of 758 patients treated with first-line thrombectomy with the SOFIA catheters. The mTICI 2b-3 rate was 71.6% (95%CI, 66.3-76.5%) while a rescue stent-retriever was used in 24.1% (95%CI, 17.7-31.9%) of cases. The overall mTICI2b-3 rate after DA and rescue therapy was 88.9% (95%CI, 82.6-93.1%). We found a pooled estimate of 45.6% (95%CI, 38.6-52.8%) for functional independence, a mortality within 90 days of 19% (95%CI, 14.1-25.0%) and a rate of 5.8% (95%CI, 4.2-8.0%) of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. The DA approach for LVOS with the SOFIA catheters is highly effective with an efficacy and safety profile comparable to those found in contemporary thrombectomy trials and observational studies that use other devices or approaches.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
OBJECTIVE
Direct aspiration (DA) using large-bore distal aspiration catheters is an established strategy for the endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) of large-vessel occlusion stroke (LVOS). However, the performance of individual catheters like SOFIA has yet to be examined.
METHODS
METHODS
We present a cohort of 144 consecutive patients treated with first-line DA and SOFIA 6 F Plus catheter for LVOS. We also conducted a systematic review of the literature searching multiple databases for reports on thrombectomy with DA and SOFIA catheters and performed a meta-analysis of recanalization, safety, and clinical outcomes.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In the study cohort a successful recanalization (mTICI 2b-3) rate of 75.7% was achieved with DA alone, the global rate for functional independence (90-day mRS 0-2) was 40.3%. For the metanalysis we selected nine articles that included a total of 758 patients treated with first-line thrombectomy with the SOFIA catheters. The mTICI 2b-3 rate was 71.6% (95%CI, 66.3-76.5%) while a rescue stent-retriever was used in 24.1% (95%CI, 17.7-31.9%) of cases. The overall mTICI2b-3 rate after DA and rescue therapy was 88.9% (95%CI, 82.6-93.1%). We found a pooled estimate of 45.6% (95%CI, 38.6-52.8%) for functional independence, a mortality within 90 days of 19% (95%CI, 14.1-25.0%) and a rate of 5.8% (95%CI, 4.2-8.0%) of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The DA approach for LVOS with the SOFIA catheters is highly effective with an efficacy and safety profile comparable to those found in contemporary thrombectomy trials and observational studies that use other devices or approaches.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33818182
doi: 10.1177/15910199211005328
pmc: PMC8673889
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
850-857Références
World Neurosurg. 2019 Feb;122:e1247-e1251
pubmed: 30447455
Stroke. 2019 Feb;50(2):441-447
pubmed: 30626287
Neurosurgery. 2018 Mar 1;82(3):312-321
pubmed: 28431023
J Neurointerv Surg. 2019 Mar;11(3):226-231
pubmed: 30061367
Neuroradiology. 2019 Jan;61(1):109-111
pubmed: 30426146
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2019 Jun;40(6):1006-1012
pubmed: 31122921
JAMA. 2017 Aug 1;318(5):443-452
pubmed: 28763550
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2019 May;28(5):1329-1337
pubmed: 30772159
J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2017 May;60(3):335-347
pubmed: 28490161
Lancet Neurol. 2016 Oct;15(11):1138-47
pubmed: 27567239
Lancet. 2019 Mar 9;393(10175):998-1008
pubmed: 30860055
JAMA Neurol. 2018 Mar 1;75(3):304-311
pubmed: 29296999
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2016 May;87(5):520-5
pubmed: 25986363
Lancet. 2016 Apr 23;387(10029):1723-31
pubmed: 26898852
J Neurointerv Surg. 2016 Jul;8(7):714-8
pubmed: 26024865
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000100
pubmed: 19621070
Interv Neuroradiol. 2016 Jun;22(3):333-9
pubmed: 26908589
Lancet. 2007 Jan 27;369(9558):275-82
pubmed: 17258667
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2019 Jun;161(6):1197-1204
pubmed: 31037498
Eur J Neurol. 2018 Feb;25(2):284-292
pubmed: 29053904
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jan 1;372(1):11-20
pubmed: 25517348
J Neurointerv Surg. 2019 Jul;11(7):637-640
pubmed: 30733300
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jan 4;378(1):11-21
pubmed: 29129157
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017 Jan;38(1):90-96
pubmed: 27811134
J Neurointerv Surg. 2018 Jun;10(6):516-524
pubmed: 28963367
J Neurointerv Surg. 2014 Apr 1;6(3):231-7
pubmed: 23624315
J Neurointerv Surg. 2017 Dec;9(12):1223-1227
pubmed: 27998957
Lancet. 1998 Oct 17;352(9136):1245-51
pubmed: 9788453