Observational studyEuropean stroke journal2026
Thrombectomy for medium-sized cerebral vessel occlusion: Size does matter.
Observational study in European stroke journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRandomised controlled trials comparing endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) to medical treatment in patients with medium vessel occlusion (MeVO) suggested neutrality or futility of EVT. We studied whether the size difference between thrombectomy device and the occluded vessel influenced MeVO outcomes. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis was a retrospective single-centre observational study comprising EVT-treated patients with occlusion of the M2 branch of the middle cerebral artery on digital subtraction angiography. The diameter of the occluded M2 was measured and compared to the manufacturer's recommendation for the minimal vessel size. Based on this device-to-vessel size ratio, we divided the patients into three groups: A) ratio ⩽1.0 (device smaller or equals the vessel size), B) 1.0 < ratio ⩽ 1.2 (device larger, difference ⩽20%), and C) ratio >1.2 (device larger, significant difference >20%). The primary outcomes were futility (3-month modified Rankin scale 5 or 6) and symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH).
resultsIn the cohort of 146 patients (median age 73; 47.3% women), 58.9% were in group A, 13.7% in group B and 27.4% in group C. Patients in group C had more frequently sICH (20.0%) compared to group A (7.0%) and group B (5.0%), and the highest futility rate (34.2% vs 17.3% vs 25.0%, respectively). In the adjusted analyses, belonging to the group C was associated with sICH (OR 3.32 [1.04-10.64]) and mRS 5-6 (OR 2.84 [1.09-7.37]). DISCUSSION AND
conclusionsThe size of the thrombectomy device relative to the size of the occluded vessel is associated with haemorrhagic complications and futile 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.