ArticleEuropean stroke journal2026
Combined stent retriever and contact aspiration improves first-line recanalisation but not clinical outcomes: a pooled analysis of the ASTER, ASTER2, and VECTOR trials.
Article 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
30 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe best first-line mechanical thrombectomy treatment for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) caused by anterior large vessel occlusion (LVO) remains unclear despite four randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We compared the effectiveness and safety of the first-line combined stent retriever (SR) + contact aspiration (CA) approach with SR or CA alone for the treatment of AIS due to LVO. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis retrospective analysis combines individual patient data from 3 large multicenter, RCTs: ASTER, ASTER2, and VECTOR. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who achieved favourable recanalisation (defined as a modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score of 2b, 2c or 3) after the first-line treatment, without a second-line rescue technique. Secondary outcomes included the first pass effect, disability assessed by the 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score, 24-hour change in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), 90-day all-cause mortality, and serious procedure-related adverse events.
resultsAmong 1,185 included patients, 434 received the combined approach, 414 received CA alone, and 337 received SR alone. Baseline characteristics were similar among groups. After adjusting for factors using propensity score weighting, the primary outcome was achieved more often in the combined group compared to CA alone (risk ratio = 1.95; 95% CI, 1.42 to 2.68; P < 0.001) or SR alone (Odds ratio = 1.70; 95% CI, 1.21 to 2.38; P = .002). There were no significant differences in 24-hour change in NIHSS, 90-day mRS, or adverse events among the groups.
conclusionsIn this pooled analysis of 3 RCTs, the combined approach as the first-line treatment for anterior circulation LVO increased the probability of achieving favourable recanalisation without the need for a second-line approach, compared to CA or SR alone but no impact on clinical outcomes was detected.
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.