ArticleJournal of neuroendovascular therapy2025
Contribution of Large Bore Aspiration Catheter to Mechanical Thrombectomy.
Article in Journal of neuroendovascular therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- SNAKE-71: wire-free direct aspiration thrombectomy using the Cereglide 71 catheter for acute large vessel occlusion stroke.Scientific reports · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: In recent years, mechanical thrombectomy and aspiration catheter technology have advanced significantly, with newer aspiration catheters (ACs) featuring larger lumens and improved outcomes. However, the specific features driving these improvements remain unclear. The aim of this study was to compare treatment outcomes between the latest-generation large-bore ACs (LACs) and conventional aspiration catheters (CACs) in patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy. Methods: In this retrospective single-center cohort study conducted at the authors' institution, we analyzed data from patients who underwent mechanical thrombectomy using ACs for internal carotid artery (ICA) or M1 segment middle cerebral artery (M1) occlusions between November 2017 and October 2022. Cases were classified into LAC (inner diameter ≥0.0710 inches) and CAC groups. Patient demographics and procedural features were evaluated, including 1st-pass effect (FPE), catheter-to-vessel match (CVM), and clot contact rates. Group comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney Results: The study cohort comprised 159 patients who underwent mechanical thrombectomy using ACs. The FPE success rate was significantly higher in the LAC group (52.8%) than in the CAC group (34.0%). With regard to the occlusion site, this rate was not significantly different between the LAC and CAC groups for ICA occlusions; however, for M1 occlusions, the LAC group demonstrated a significantly higher FPE rate than the CAC group (P = 0.009). CVM and clot contact rates were significantly higher in the LAC group (P = 0.001 and P ≤0.0001, respectively). In the LAC group, both CVM and clot contact were independently associated with FPE success in cases of M1 occlusion (odds ratio, 10.9; 95% confidence interval, 3.3-36.7; P <0.0001; odds ratio, 18.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.9-172.9; P = 0.013, respectively). Conclusion: LACs yielded significantly better outcomes for M1 occlusions than CACs. The enhanced FPE rate appears attributable to 2 design advantages: increased bore size, which improves CVM, and superior trackability, which enhances clot contact. These findings suggest that, given the vessel diameter variations caused by factors beyond anatomical location, tailoring mechanical thrombectomy methods and device selection to individual vascular anatomy, rather than relying on fixed vessel-based criteria, may improve treatment outcomes.
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.