Observational studyClinical neuroradiology2023
Intracranial Carotid Occlusions : ADAPT versus SAVE and the role of Balloon Guide Catheters.
Observational study in Clinical neuroradiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence, strategies, and pathways for thrombectomy in medium vessel occlusion stroke: a systematic review.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Key to better outcomes in stroke intervention: early versus complete reperfusion in first pass recanalization.Journal of neurology · 2025Observational
- Does endovascular thrombectomy using super-bore 0.088" large distal platform offer advantages over balloon guide catheters in acute ischemic stroke secondary to large vessel occlusion?Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2025Article
- Combined Aspiration and Stent Retriever Thrombectomy for Distal Carotid Artery Occlusion Using Balloon Guide versus Non-Balloon Guide Catheter.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSpecific decisions made by neurointerventionists are often lost behind the data of large-scale trials, and many of these studies have taken place before the development of new techniques and devices. This study compares the stent-retriever assisted vacuum-locked extraction (SAVE) technique with a direct aspiration first pass (ADAPT), as well as the use of a balloon guide catheter (BGC), in intracranial internal carotid artery (IC-ICA) occlusions.
methodsObservational and retrospective study from an Italian hospital, including patients who underwent thrombectomy for IC-ICA occlusion between 1 January 2019 and 31 March 2021.
resultsOut of 91 IC-ICA occlusions, the ADAPT was the first choice in 20 (22%) and the SAVE in 71 (78%). A BGC was used in 32 (35%) cases, always in conjunction with the SAVE technique. The use of SAVE technique without BGC was associated with the least risk of distal embolization (DE) in the territory occluded (44% vs. 75% when ADAPT technique was used; p = 0.03) and achieved first pass effect (FPE) more frequently (51% vs. 25%, p = 0.09). When the SAVE technique was used, BGC (BGC-SAVE) compared to no BGC (NoBGC-SAVE) was associated with a tendency for less DE (31% vs. 44%, p = 0.3), more FPE (63% vs. 51%, p = 0.5), the same median number of passes (1, p = 0.8) and similar groin-to-recanalization times (36.5 vs. 35.5 min, p = 0.5), none of which reached statistical significance.
conclusionOur findings support the use of SAVE technique for IC-ICA occlusions; the added benefit of BGC compared to long sheaths was not remarkable in this sample.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.