First-line use of contact aspiration for thrombectomy versus a stent retriever for recanalization in acute cerebral infarction: The randomized ASTER study protocol

Rationale Mechanical thrombectomy with a stent retriever is now the standard of care in anterior circulation ischemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion. New techniques for mechanical thrombectomy, such as contact aspiration, appear promising to increase reperfusion status and improve clinical outcome. Aim We aim at ascertaining whether contact aspiration is more efficient than the stent retriever as a first-line endovascular procedure. Sample size estimates With a two-sided test (alpha = 5%, power = 90%) and an anticipated rate of spontaneous recanalization and catheterization failures of 15%, we estimate that a sample size of 380 patients will be necessary to detect an absolute difference of 15% in primary outcome (superiority design). Methods and design The ASTER trial is a prospective, randomized, multicenter, controlled, open-label, blinded end-point clinical trial. Patients admitted with suspected ischemic anterior circulation stroke secondary to large vessel occlusion, with onset of symptoms <6 h, will be randomly assigned to contact aspiration or stent retriever in a 1:1 ratio; stratified by center and prior IV thrombolysis. If the assigned treatment technique is not successful after three attempts, another technique will be applied, at the operator's discretion. Study outcomes The primary outcome will be successful recanalization (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score 2b-3) at the end of the endovascular procedures. Secondary outcome will include successful recanalization after the assigned first-line treatment technique alone, procedural times, the need for a rescue technique, complications and modified Rankin Scale at three months. Discussion No previous head to head randomized trials have directly compared contact aspiration versus stent retriever reperfusion techniques. This prospective trial aims to provide further evidence of benefit of contact aspiration versus stent retriever techniques among patients with ischemic stroke

Effect of Thrombectomy With Combined Contact Aspiration and Stent Retriever vs Stent Retriever Alone on Revascularization in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke and Large Vessel Occlusion: The ASTER2 Randomized Clinical Trial

International audienceImportance Mechanical thrombectomy using a stent retriever or contact aspiration is widely used for treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke due to anterior circulation large vessel occlusion, but the additional benefit of combining contact aspiration with stent retriever is uncertain.Objective To determine whether mechanical thrombectomy for treatment of anterior circulation large vessel occlusion stroke with initial contact aspiration and stent retriever combined results in better final angiographic outcome than with standard stent retriever alone.Design, Setting, and Participants This trial was a multicenter randomized, open-label, blinded end point evaluation that enrolled 408 patients from October 16, 2017, to May 29, 2018, in 11 French comprehensive stroke centers, with a 12-month outcome follow-up. Patients with a large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation were included up to 8 hours after symptom onset. The final date of follow-up was June, 19, 2019.Interventions Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 allocation) to receive initial thrombectomy with contact aspiration and stent retriever combined (205) or stent retriever alone (203).Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the rate of expanded Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction score of 2c or 3 (eTICI 2c/3; ie, scores indicate near-total and total reperfusion grades) at the end of the procedure.Results Among the 408 patients who were randomized, 3 were excluded, and 405 (99.3%) patients (mean age, 73 years; 220 [54%] women and 185 [46%] men) were included in the primary analysis. The rate of eTICI 2c/3 at the end of the endovascular procedure was not significantly different between the 2 thrombectomy groups (64.5% [131 of 203 patients] for contact aspiration and stent retriever combined vs 57.9% [117 of 202 patients] for stent retriever alone; risk difference, 6.6% [95% CI, –3.0% to 16.2%]; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.33 [95% CI, 0.88 to 1.99]; P = .17). Of 14 prespecified secondary efficacy end points, 12 showed no significant difference. A higher rate of successful reperfusion was achieved in the contact aspiration combined with stent retriever group vs the stent retriever alone group (eTICI 2b50/2c/3, 86.2% vs 72.3%; adjusted OR, 2.54 [95% CI, 1.51 to 4.28]; P < .001) and of near-total or total reperfusion (eTICI 2c/3, 59.6% vs 49.5%; adjusted OR, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.02 to 2.27]; P = .04) after the assigned initial intervention alone.Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion, an initial thrombectomy technique consisting of contact aspiration and stent retriever combined, compared with stent retriever alone, did not significantly improve the rate of near-total or total reperfusion (eTICI 2c/3) at the end of the endovascular procedure, although the trial may have been underpowered to detect smaller differences between groups

Mechanical Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke Amid the COVID-19 Outbreak

International audienceBackground and Purpose: The efficiency of prehospital care chain response and the adequacy of hospital resources are challenged amid the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, with suspected consequences for patients with ischemic stroke eligible for mechanical thrombectomy (MT). Methods: We conducted a prospective national-level data collection of patients treated with MT, ranging 45 days across epidemic containment measures instatement, and of patients treated during the same calendar period in 2019. The primary end point was the variation of patients receiving MT during the epidemic period. Secondary end points included care delays between onset, imaging, and groin puncture. To analyze the primary end point, we used a Poisson regression model. We then analyzed the correlation between the number of MTs and the number of COVID-19 cases hospitalizations, using the Pearson correlation coefficient (compared with the null value). Results: A total of 1513 patients were included at 32 centers, in all French administrative regions. There was a 21% significant decrease (0.79; [95%CI, 0.76–0.82]; P <0.001) in MT case volumes during the epidemic period, and a significant increase in delays between imaging and groin puncture, overall (mean 144.9±SD 86.8 minutes versus 126.2±70.9; P <0.001 in 2019) and in transferred patients (mean 182.6±SD 82.0 minutes versus 153.25±67; P <0.001). After the instatement of strict epidemic mitigation measures, there was a significant negative correlation between the number of hospitalizations for COVID and the number of MT cases ( R 2 −0.51; P =0.04). Patients treated during the COVID outbreak were less likely to receive intravenous thrombolysis and to have unwitnessed strokes (both P <0.05). Conclusions: Our study showed a significant decrease in patients treated with MTs during the first stages of the COVID epidemic in France and alarming indicators of lengthened care delays. These findings prompt immediate consideration of local and regional stroke networks preparedness in the varying contexts of COVID-19 pandemic evolution