Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34581737›Full record

Trial reportJAMA2021

Effect of Thrombectomy With Combined Contact Aspiration and Stent Retriever vs Stent Retriever Alone on Revascularization in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke and Large Vessel Occlusion: The ASTER2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Bertrand Lapergue, Raphaël Blanc, Vincent Costalat, Hubert Desal, Susanna Saleme, Laurent Spelle, Gaultier Marnat, Eimad Shotar, Francois Eugene, Mikael Mazighi and 13 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 93 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
93citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
16.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT03290885 nacompletednot on this map

Combined Use of Contact Aspiration and the Stent Retriever Technique Versus Stent Retriever Alone for Recanalisation in Acute Cerebral Infarction: the Randomized ASTER2 Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorHopital FochRan2017 to 2020Enrolled408ConditionsAcute Ischemic StrokeArmsCombined contact aspiration/Stent Retriever Technique, Stent retriever technique
NCT06254755 naenrolling by invitationnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes Between Suction Aspiration Method and Combination Method of Intra-arterial Therapy (IAT) in Large Artery Occlusion: Randomized Open-labelled Prospective Multicenter Trials

TypeinterventionalSponsorInje University Haeundae Paik HospitalRan2022 to 2027Enrolled1,132ConditionsAcute Cerebral Ischemia Requiring for Mechanical ThrombectomyArmsmechanical thrombectomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

93 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 173 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. RESCUE-ICAS: Rationale and Study Design.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2023
    Trial
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

33 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

23 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Bertrand LapergueDepartment of Neurology, Stroke Center, University of Versailles and Saint Quentin en Yvelines, Foch Hospital, Suresnes, France.
Raphaël BlancDepartment of Interventional Neuroradiology, Rothschild Foundation, Paris, France.
Vincent CostalatDepartment of Neuroradiology, University Hospital Güi-de-Chauliac, Hospital Center University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Hubert DesalDepartment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Nantes, Thorax Institute, INSERM 1087, CNRS, UNIV Nantes, Nantes, Pays de la Loire, France.
Susanna SalemeDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Limoges, Limoges, France.
Laurent SpelleBicêtre Hospital, Department of Interventional Neuroradiology, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France.
Gaultier MarnatDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Eimad ShotarDepartment of Neuroradiology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Paris, France.
Francois EugeneDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France.
Mikael MazighiDepartment of Interventional Neuroradiology, Rothschild Foundation, Paris, France.
Emmanuel HoudartDepartment of Neuroradiology, Lariboisière Hospital, Paris, France.
Arturo ConsoliDepartment of Neurology, Stroke Center, University of Versailles and Saint Quentin en Yvelines, Foch Hospital, Suresnes, France.
Georges RodeschDepartment of Interventional Neuroradiology, Rothschild Foundation, Paris, France.
Romain BourcierDepartment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Nantes, Thorax Institute, INSERM 1087, CNRS, UNIV Nantes, Nantes, Pays de la Loire, France.
Serge BracardUniversity of Lorraine, CHRU-Nancy, Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Neuroradiology, F-54000 Nancy, France and University of Lorraine, IADI, INSERM U1254, F-54000 Nancy, France.
Alain DuhamelUniversity of Lille, CHU Lille, ULR 2694 - METRICS: Assessment of Health Technologies and Medical Practices, F-59000 Lille, France.
Maalek Ben MaachaDepartment of Interventional Neuroradiology, Rothschild Foundation, Paris, France.
Delphine LopezDepartment of Neurology, Stroke Center, University of Versailles and Saint Quentin en Yvelines, Foch Hospital, Suresnes, France.
Nicholas RenaudDepartment of Neurology, Stroke Center, University of Versailles and Saint Quentin en Yvelines, Foch Hospital, Suresnes, France.
Julien LabreucheUniversity of Lille, CHU Lille, ULR 2694 - METRICS: Assessment of Health Technologies and Medical Practices, F-59000 Lille, France.
Benjamin GoryUniversity of Lorraine, CHRU-Nancy, Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Neuroradiology, F-54000 Nancy, France and University of Lorraine, IADI, INSERM U1254, F-54000 Nancy, France.
Michel PiotinDepartment of Interventional Neuroradiology, Rothschild Foundation, Paris, France.
ASTER2 Trial Investigators
ASTER · CAUniversité de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines · FRHôpital Lariboisière · FRUniversité de Bordeaux · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Mechanical thrombectomy using a stent retriever or contact aspiration is widely used for treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke due to anterior circulation large vessel occlusion, but the additional benefit of combining contact aspiration with stent retriever is uncertain. Objective: To determine whether mechanical thrombectomy for treatment of anterior circulation large vessel occlusion stroke with initial contact aspiration and stent retriever combined results in better final angiographic outcome than with standard stent retriever alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: This trial was a multicenter randomized, open-label, blinded end point evaluation that enrolled 408 patients from October 16, 2017, to May 29, 2018, in 11 French comprehensive stroke centers, with a 12-month outcome follow-up. Patients with a large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation were included up to 8 hours after symptom onset. The final date of follow-up was June, 19, 2019. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 allocation) to receive initial thrombectomy with contact aspiration and stent retriever combined (205) or stent retriever alone (203). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the rate of expanded Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction score of 2c or 3 (eTICI 2c/3; ie, scores indicate near-total and total reperfusion grades) at the end of the procedure. Results: Among the 408 patients who were randomized, 3 were excluded, and 405 (99.3%) patients (mean age, 73 years; 220 [54%] women and 185 [46%] men) were included in the primary analysis. The rate of eTICI 2c/3 at the end of the endovascular procedure was not significantly different between the 2 thrombectomy groups (64.5% [131 of 203 patients] for contact aspiration and stent retriever combined vs 57.9% [117 of 202 patients] for stent retriever alone; risk difference, 6.6% [95% CI, -3.0% to 16.2%]; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.33 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.99]; P = .17). Of 14 prespecified secondary efficacy end points, 12 showed no significant difference. A higher rate of successful reperfusion was achieved in the contact aspiration combined with stent retriever group vs the stent retriever alone group (eTICI 2b50/2c/3, 86.2% vs 72.3%; adjusted OR, 2.54 [95% CI, 1.51 to 4.28]; P < .001) and of near-total or total reperfusion (eTICI 2c/3, 59.6% vs 49.5%; adjusted OR, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.02 to 2.27]; P = .04) after the assigned initial intervention alone. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion, an initial thrombectomy technique consisting of contact aspiration and stent retriever combined, compared with stent retriever alone, did not significantly improve the rate of near-total or total reperfusion (eTICI 2c/3) at the end of the endovascular procedure, although the trial may have been underpowered to detect smaller differences between groups. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03290885.

Indexed as

Device RemovalStentsAgedArterial Occlusive DiseasesCombined Modality TherapyFemaleHumansIschemic StrokeMaleReperfusionThrombectomyTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID34581737
PMCPMC8479584
OpenAlexW3202287757

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.