Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34357030›Full record

ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Inadvertent Detachment of Stent Retrievers during Mechanical Thrombectomy-A Clinical and Biomechanical Perspective.

Piotr Piasecki, Marek Wierzbicki, Piotr Tulik, Katarzyna Potocka, Adam Stępień, Jacek Staszewski, Aleksander Dębiec, Jerzy Narloch

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 49% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Piotr PiaseckiDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Military Institute of Medicine, 04-141 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-3968-7463
Marek WierzbickiDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Military Institute of Medicine, 04-141 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-1109-3164
Piotr TulikFaculty of Mechatronics, Institute of Metrology and Biomedical Engineering, Warsaw University of Technology, 02-525 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-7512-680X
Katarzyna PotockaFaculty of Mechatronics, Institute of Metrology and Biomedical Engineering, Warsaw University of Technology, 02-525 Warsaw, Poland.
Adam StępieńDepartment of Neurology, Military Institute of Medicine, 04-141 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-0214-4940
Jacek StaszewskiDepartment of Neurology, Military Institute of Medicine, 04-141 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-5588-9148
Aleksander DębiecDepartment of Neurology, Military Institute of Medicine, 04-141 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-0780-3186
Jerzy NarlochDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Military Institute of Medicine, 04-141 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-6856-111X
Wojskowy Instytut Medycyny Lotniczej · PLWarsaw University of Technology · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe inadvertent detachment of stent retrievers during mechanical thrombectomy is an extremely rare but feared complication associated with poor clinical outcomes. We discuss management considerations after an unexpected disconnection of the pRESET stent retriever during mechanical thrombectomy, based on clinical experience and mechanical and phantom studies.

methodsWe present a clinical course of rare accidents of stent-retriever separation inside an intracranial vessel that occurred in patients in a comprehensive stroke centre between 2018 and 2020. We designed a phantom study to assess the Tigertriever's ability to remove a detached stent retriever from intercranial vessels. In the mechanical study, several types of stent retrievers were evaluated in order to find the weakest point at which detachment occurred.

resultsTwo patients (~0.7%) with inadvertent stent-retriever detachment were found in our database. Failed attempts of endovascular removal with no recanalization at the end of procedure were reported in both cases. mRS after 3 months was three and four respectively. In the mechanical study, the Tigertriever was the most resistant to detachment and was followed by Embotrap > pRESET > 3D Separator. In the phantom study, the pRESET device detached in a configuration resembling the M1 segment was successfully removed with the Tigertriever.

conclusionsConservative management of the inadvertent detachment of stent retrievers during mechanical thrombectomy in large vessel occlusion may be acceptable in order to avoid further periprocedural complications after unsuccessful device removal attempts. Based on the phantom and mechanical studies, the Tigertriever may be a useful tool for the removal of detached pRESET devices.

Indexed as

inadvertent detachmentmechanical thrombectomypRESETstent-retrieverTigertriever

Identifiers

PMID34357030
PMCPMC8307901
OpenAlexW3178863948

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.