ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Neurol.
Sec. Stroke
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fneur.2025.1620092
Efficacy and Procedural Efficiency of Mechanical Thrombectomy Devices in Posterior Circulation Stroke
Provisionally accepted- 1Department of Neurology and Stroke Center, Luhe Hospital, Capital Medical University,, Beijing, China
- 2Department of Neurosurgery, Munson Medical Center, Traverse City.MI, United States
- 3Department of Neurosurgery, Munson Healthcare, Traverse City, MI, United States
- 4Department of Neurosurgery, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI 48201, United States
- 5Luhe Institute of Neuroscience, Capital Medical University, beijing, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background and Purpose: Posterior circulation stroke patients have worse outcomes after mechanical thrombectomy (MT) and higher mortality than anterior circulation acute ischemic stroke patients (AIS) due to large vessel occlusions (LVO). To determine the ideal recanalization device for posterior circulation LVO strokes, this study compared the operational parameters and prognosis among three commonly used thrombectomy devices.: A total of 99 patients with posterior circulation AIS who underwent mechanical thrombectomy were enrolled. The patients were divided into three groups based on different thrombectomy devices used during the procedure. Patient demographics, procedural metrics, functional outcomes, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) were assessed. Any association between the devices and favorable clinical outcomes were assessed by logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 80 patients were analyzed. The Penumbra aspiration catheter revealed a significant advantage for the time of recanalization versus the other devices (32min vs. 44 and 41min). No significant difference was observed in other procedural parameters or functional outcome. There was no significant difference in symptomatic cerebral hemorrhage (sICH), mortality or functional independence after MT among the three groups. Diabetes mellitus, NIHSS score at admission, time from onset to recanalization and occlusion site were associated with functional independence at 90 days, though use of different recanalization devices did not make significant difference. Conclusion: Aspiration achieved vessel recanalization faster than retriever stent during mechanical thrombectomy in posterior circulation AIS. No clear improved functional outcome favored one device over another in this study. The key factors affecting functional outcomes in posterior circulation LVO were presence or absence of diabetes, baseline NIHSS, occlusion site of basilar artery, and TOR time.
Keywords: Acute ischemic stroke, Endovascular therapy (EVT), penumbra aspiration catheter, solitaire retriever stent, trevo retriever stent, prognosis
Received: 29 Apr 2025; Accepted: 08 Jul 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Ma, Cheng, Rajah, Yun, Ding and Geng. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Yuchuan Ding, Department of Neurosurgery, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI 48201, United States
Xiaokun Geng, Department of Neurosurgery, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI 48201, United States
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.