Thrombectomy with clamping embolus technique for acute intracranial large vessel embolism compared with conventional stent retrievers thrombectomy
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1006-7876.2017.10.007
- VernacularTitle:钳夹取栓治疗急性颅内大血管栓塞与传统Solitaire支架取栓对照研究
- Author:
Zhensheng LIU
1
;
Yong SUN
;
Longjiang ZHOU
;
Xiongwei KUANG
;
Jiaxiang WANG
;
Xinjiang ZHANG
Author Information
1. 扬州市第一人民医院放射科
- Keywords:
Brain infarction;
Radiology;
interventional;
Catheterization;
Thrombectomy
- From:
Chinese Journal of Neurology
2017;50(10):751-756
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To evaluate the safety and efficiency of thrombectomy with clamping embolus technique ( TCET ) by partial retrieving stent comparing with conventional stent retrievers thrombectomy (CSRT) for acute ischemic stroke.Methods Retrospective analysis was performed in 42 consecutive patients treated by stent retrievers thrombectomy between January 2015 and November 2016 for acute intracranial large vessel embolism . Data on recanalization rates , procedure duration , thrombectomy attempts, one-pass rate, postoperative subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH),and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score during 90 days follow-up were compared between TCET and CSRT groups .Results Recanalization rate was 90.0%(18/20) in TCET group and 90.9% (20/22) in CSRT group, post-procedural SAH was 10.0%(2/20) in TCET group and 13.6% (3/22) in CSRT group, good outcome (mRS score≤2) was 60.0%(12/20) in TCET group and 59.1% (13/22) in CSRT group, all without significant differences (P>0.05).The number of thrombectomy attempts with TCET was significantly lower than that with CSRT (1.7 ±0.5 vs 2.6 ±0.8, t=2.118, P=0.040), the procedure duration with TCET was significantly shorter than that with CSRT ( (36.8 ±8.6) min vs (55.5 ±10.5) min, t=-3.493, P=0.001) and one-pass thrombectomy rate with TCET was significantly higher than that with CSRT ( 60.0% ( 12/20 ) vs 22.7%(5/22), χ2 =6.041,P=0.014) .Conclusion TCET is safe and feasible for acute ischemic stroke and might improve the efficiency of thrombectomy comparing with CSRT .
