SynthesisFrontiers in neurology
Radially adjustable Tigertriever demonstrates higher reperfusion compared to self-expanding stent-retrievers during mechanical thrombectomy of large vessel occlusions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Mechanical thrombectomy is the standard of care for acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusions. Conventional self-expanding stent retrievers (SE-SRs) deploy with fixed radial force, whereas Tigertriever is a radially adjustable operator-controlled device that allows tailored expansion and modulation of vessel wall pressure. This study systematically compared the efficacy and safety of Tigertriever with SE-SRs in large vessel occlusion thrombectomy. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted in line with PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies compared Tigertriever with SE-SRs, with outcomes including rate of successful reperfusion (mTICI ≥ 2b), procedural adverse events (PAEs; composite of procedure-related vasospasm, dissection, perforation, distal emboli, emboli to new territory, and subarachnoid hemorrhage), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) within 24 h post-procedure, functional independence (mRS 0-2) at 90 days and all-cause mortality at 90 days. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I, and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Results: Three retrospective cohort studies with 476 patients (210 Tigertriever, 266 SE-SR) were included. Target intracranial vessel occlusion locations were internal carotid artery (ICA), middle cerebral artery (MCA) M1, MCA M2 and basilar artery. Tigertriever achieved significantly higher successful reperfusion compared with SE-SRs [82.8% vs. 77.8%; OR 1.74 (1.07-2.83); Conclusion: In this exploratory meta-analysis of retrospective cohorts, Tigertriever was associated with significantly higher reperfusion rates, while safety and functional outcomes appeared comparable between groups. Findings should be interpreted cautiously given study-level heterogeneity, limited sample size, inconsistent procedural reporting, and the observational nature of included studies. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251161491. The protocol for this meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO. ID: CRD420251161491.
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.