ArticleInterventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences2026
Optimizing catheter centering enhances mechanical thrombectomy success: Performance difference in cases using novel macrowires versus traditional microwires.
Article in Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- First-pass efficacy with simplicity: Macrowire-only direct aspiration technique in posterior circulation mechanical thrombectomy.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2025Article
- Macrowire-only direct aspiration first-pass technique for endovascular mechanical thrombectomy: Multicenter technical series using the 0.035″ aristotle Colossus wire.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundThe aim of this study is to determine how guidewire selection impacts procedure time and success and analyze if the trend toward the adoption of larger diameter guidewires provides a quantifiable advantage over traditional 0.014″ guidewires.MethodsA review of 494 consecutively performed acute ischemic stroke cases performed between 2018 and 2022 were reviewed and grouped into cases using a single 0.014″ outer diameter (OD) guidewire (195 cases) and cases using a single 0.018″ or 0.024″ OD guidewire (128 cases). These groups were compared for differences in average time to recanalization, average number of passes to achieve recanalization, and first pass success. Cases were compared overall, and further analyzed by region of occlusion to look at specific guidewire related differences for cases with M1, M2, and ICA occlusions.ResultsProcedures using a larger OD guidewire have an average 5 min and 30 s reduction in time from puncture to recanalization (p = 0.0201). ICA occlusion cases using a larger macrowire show a 20 min reduction in recanalization time (p = 0.0005), a reduction in average number of passes from 2.6 to 1.7 (p = 0.0058), and an increase in first pass success from 18.8% to 58.3% when compared to traditional guidewires.ConclusionLarge 0.018″ or 0.024″ OD guidewires better fill the lumen of the catheter and help to center the thrombectomy system in the vessel and navigate to the clot face. This leads to a reduction in procedure time and number of passes, and an increase in first pass success, especially when treating occlusions in the ICA.
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.