Endovascular Device Choice and Tools for Recanalization of Medium Vessel Occlusions: Insights From the MeVO FRONTIERS International Survey

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00159816%3A_____%2F21%3A00074966" target="_blank" >RIV/00159816:_____/21:00074966 - isvavai.cz</a>

Alternative codes found

RIV/00216224:14110/21:00124157

Result on the web

<a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.735899/full" target="_blank" >https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fneur.2021.735899/full</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.735899" target="_blank" >10.3389/fneur.2021.735899</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

Endovascular Device Choice and Tools for Recanalization of Medium Vessel Occlusions: Insights From the MeVO FRONTIERS International Survey

Original language description

Background: Endovascular treatment (EVT) for stroke due to medium vessel occlusion (MeVO) can be technically challenging. Devices and tools are rapidly evolving. We aimed to gain insight into preferences and global perspectives on the usage of endovascular tools in treating MeVOs. Methods: We conducted an international survey with seven scenarios of patients presenting A3, M2/3, M3, M3/4, or P2/3 occlusions. Respondents were asked for their preferred first-line endovascular approach, and whether they felt that the appropriate endovascular tools were available to them. Answers were analyzed by occlusion location and geographical region of practice, using multinomial/binary logistic regression. Results: A total of 263 neurointerventionists provided 1836 responses. The first-line preferences of physicians were evenly distributed among stent-retrievers, combined approaches, and aspiration only (33.2, 29.8, and 26.8%, respectively). A3 occlusions were more often treated with stent-retrievers (RR 1.21, 95% CI: 1.07-1.36), while intra-arterial thrombolysis was more often preferred in M3 (RR 2.47, 95% CI: 1.53-3.98) and M3/4 occlusions (RR 7.71, 95% CI: 4.16-14.28) compared to M2/3 occlusions. Respondents who thought appropriate tools are currently not available more often chose stent retrievers alone (RR 2.07; 95% CI: 1.01-4.24) or intra-arterial thrombolysis (RR 3.35, 95% CI: 1.26-8.42). Physicians who stated that they do not have access to optimal tools opted more often not to treat at all (RR 3.41, 95% CI: 1.11-10.49). Stent-retrievers alone were chosen more often and contact aspiration alone less often as a first-line approach in Europe (RR 2.12, 95% CI: 1.38-3.24; and RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.34-0.70, respectively) compared to the United States and Canada. Conclusions: In EVT for MeVO strokes, neurointerventionalists choose a targeted vessel specific first-line approach depending on the occlusion location, region of practice, and availability of the appropriate tools.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_imp - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

30210 - Clinical neurology

Project

—

Continuities

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Publication year

2021

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

Frontiers in Neurology

ISSN

1664-2295

e-ISSN

—

Volume of the periodical

12

Issue of the periodical within the volume

SEP 15

Country of publishing house

CH - SWITZERLAND

Number of pages

7

Pages from-to

735899

UT code for WoS article

000701296000001

EID of the result in the Scopus database

—