We found that the two stentriever devices (ST and TV) showed similar recanalization rates and clinical outcomes in patients with anterior circulation large artery occlusion. Recently, randomized controlled studies of endovascular treatments for acute ischemic stroke due to anterior circulation large artery occlusion have demonstrated their improving efficacy and safety (
6-
10). Stentriever devices play an important role in the modern era of endovascular thrombolysis, but there have been only a limited number of case series directly comparing the stentriever devices (
11,
14). Our study was a direct comparative study of a relatively large number of ischemic stroke patients treated using two different stentriever devices.
In our study, there was no difference in terms of baseline demographic characteristics (including stroke risk factors), stroke severity, occlusion location, procedure time, sICH, or mortality between the ST and TV groups. Recent large randomized controlled studies reported effective clinical outcomes (mRS score ≤ 2 in 32.6% - 71.0% of patients) at 3 months, with a relatively high rate of recanalization (mTICI 2b-3 in 58.7% - 88.0%) and a low mortality rate (9.0% - 21.0%) (
6-
10). Compared with previous large randomized controlled studies, there was a similar trend in terms of overall recanalization rate (89.4%) and good clinical outcome (48.9%). Furthermore, there was also no difference in outcomes observed between the two groups. However, overall sICH tended to be slightly higher in both groups compared to those studies (
6-
10). The slightly higher sICH rate probably occurred because the sample size was relatively small. No permanent device-related complications, such as a failure to deploy the stentriever, perforation, dissection, or thrombus formation, occurred in either group. In the evaluation of the independent predictors of good clinical outcomes, there was no difference between the two different stentrievers (ST vs. TV). The good collateral was the only significant factor in good outcome at 3 months. The sufficient baseline collateral status in acute ischemic stroke patients was associated with improved functional recovery and decreased mortality rate at 3 months after stroke (
15). Our study showed similar results that collaterals are important for the clinical outcome of acute ischemic stroke patients.
The TV was designed to facilitate proper visualization of the complete device by integrating the platinum wires into the stent struts itself (
16-
18). Full structural visibility of the stent during deployment and retrieval allow procedural adaptation or modification by enhancing the operator’s understanding of the actual stent-clot or stent-vessel interaction (
16). Subjectively, proper visualization of the stent helped to position the TV stentriever in the correct position at emergency situations where the patient was not cooperative.
Early reperfusion through recanalization is an important factor in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (
1,
2). Intracranial atherosclerotic disease, which is more common in Asian populations, has limited treatment options because of the tendency of stenotic lesions to reocclude (
4,
19,
20). There is a report demonstrating that stentriever thrombectomy can achieve partial recanalization, allowing the planning of subsequent rescue treatments (
21). However, there is a published case where stentriever thrombectomy fails to obtain satisfactory recanalization (
22). If successful recanalization fails, permanent stenting may be a rescue modality for anterior circulation large artery occlusion (
22,
23). Because the ST has a detachable property, permanent stenting using ST may be effective when rapid rescue treatment is needed (
23).
This study had some limitations. This study was a retrospective study based on a database at a single institution. In order to minimize the effect of selection bias, all cases were registered in the prospectively maintained neurointervenional database with descriptions of the procedural details and complications in our institution. Another limitation is that selection of the device was not randomized but was left to the discretion of the individual neurointerventionalist. Nevertheless, baseline characteristics of the patients were well balanced in terms of occlusion location, cause of stroke, collateral flow, and initial stroke severity. Furthermore, this study is unique in comparing the performance of each stentriever device in a relatively large number of patients with anterior circulation large artery occlusion. Recently, various devices that are effective and safe have been introduced for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. However, there is still a lack of comparative studies on ischemic stroke treatment using these devices. Consequently, we plan to perform a further large prospective study evaluating the effectiveness and safety of these new devices.
In conclusion, our study suggests that the two stentriever devices show similar recanalization rates and clinical outcomes in patients with anterior circulation large artery occlusion. Recently, various devices that are effective and safe have been introduced. Further well-designed, randomized prospective studies of the different devices are necessary to determine their role in the effective and safe treatment of acute ischemic stroke.