Trial reportJournal of Korean medical science2026
Comparison of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes Between Suction Aspiration and Combination Methods of Mechanical Thrombectomy in Patients With Acute Cerebral Infarction: The COMPETE Trial.
Trial report in Journal of Korean medical science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06254755 (Comparison of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes Between Suction Aspiration Method and Combination Method of Intra-arterial Therapy), which is not on this 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.
Comparison of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes Between Suction Aspiration Method and Combination Method of Intra-arterial Therapy (IAT) in Large Artery Occlusion: Randomized Open-labelled Prospective Multicenter Trials
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
31 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecent advances in suction catheter technology suggest that suction aspiration may prevent thrombus fragmentation during mechanical thrombectomy. We therefore hypothesize that the radiological outcomes of suction aspiration as a first-line treatment would not be inferior to those of the combination technique. This study aims to evaluate the radiological and clinical outcomes of first-line suction aspiration compared with those of the first-line combination technique for large artery occlusion amenable to both modalities.
methodsThe COMPETE trial is a prospective, randomized, multicenter, noninferiority, open-label trial. A total of 1,136 patients will be randomized at a 1:1 ratio to either the suction aspiration or combination technique groups.
resultsThe primary endpoints are successful recanalization (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction scale score ≥ 2b) and a good clinical outcome (modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2) at 90 days after thrombectomy. The technical outcome is the switching rate from the combination technique to suction aspiration and from suction aspiration to the combination technique. The safety outcomes include procedural morbidity, nonprocedural morbidity, procedural mortality, and nonprocedural mortality.
conclusionThe COMPETE trial is expected to determine whether the use of suction aspiration as a first-line approach in patients with acute ischemic stroke is noninferior to the combination technique in achieving successful radiological and good clinical outcomes.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06254755; CRIS (KCT0007726).
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.