ArticleScientific reports2025
A comparative study on the efficacy of two different types of intracranial stent retrievers based on finite element simulation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Four-dimensional reconfigurable vascular tunneling machine of spatially programmed liquid crystal elastomers.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Making the invisible visible: integrated visualization and automated quantification of thrombus deformation during mechanical thrombectomy.Frontiers in medical technology · 2026Article
- Mechanism and Data-Driven Grain Condition Information Perception Method for Comprehensive Grain Storage Monitoring.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigates the thrombectomy performance of open (Solitaire FR 6 × 30) and closed (Trevo XP ProVue 6 × 25) stent retrievers in patient-specific vasculature using finite element analysis (FEA). The aim is to inform stent design optimization and improve surgical strategies. Patient-specific vascular models, thrombus models, and stent retriever models were constructed using CAD software. FEA simulated the thrombectomy procedure, and the simulation results were validated through in vitro experiments. The FEA predicted successful thrombus retrieval with the Solitaire FR 6 × 30, consistent with in vitro findings. Conversely, the Trevo XP ProVue 6 × 25 failed to retrieve the thrombus in the simulation. During Solitaire FR 6 × 30 thrombectomy, maximum thrombus stress (48.733 MPa), strain (2.257) and contact pressure on the vessel wall (7.177 MPa) were substantially higher than those observed during Trevo XP ProVue 6 × 25 thrombectomy (15.824 MPa, 1.554, and 1.872 MPa, respectively). Specifically, the Solitaire FR 6 × 30 induced 3.19 times greater maximum thrombus stress, 1.45 times greater maximum thrombus strain, and 2.83 times greater maximum vessel wall contact pressure. These findings suggest that the Solitaire FR stent retriever demonstrates superior thrombectomy efficacy compared to the Trevo XP stent retriever, likely attributable to its higher radial support force. However, the increased force exerted on the thrombus and vessel wall by the Solitaire FR raises the potential risk of thrombus fragmentation and vascular injury.
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.