Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

Balloon-mounted versus self-expandable stent in failed neurothrombectomy: a post hoc analysis of the SAINT study

  • Mahmoud H. Mohammaden
    ,
  • Pedro N. Martins
    ,
  • Hassan Aboul-Nour
    ,
  • Alhamza R. Al-Bayati
    ,
  • Ameer E. Hassan
    ,
  • Wondwossen Tekle
*Corresponding author for this work
  • Emory School of Medicine
    ,
  • Faculty of Medicine
    ,
  • Grady Health System
    ,
  • University of Kentucky College of Medicine
    ,
  • University of Pittsburgh Medical Center
    ,
  • University of Texas Rio Grande Valley School of Medicine
Research Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Publication Information

Output type

Research Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages e295-e302

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery (Volume 17, Issue e2)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 01/05/2025

Publication status

Published - 01/05/2025

ISSN

1759-8478

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 85217140055
  • PubMed: 39884852

Abstract

Background Previous studies have shown that when thrombectomy has failed, rescue intracranial stenting is associated with better clinical outcomes compared with failed reperfusion. However, comparative data regarding stent type are lacking. Objective To compare the procedural and clinical outcomes of balloon-mounted stents (BMS) with those of self-expandable stents (SES). Methods Retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database from the Stenting and Angioplasty in NeuroThrombectomy (SAINT) consortium. Patients were included if thrombectomy had failed and they then underwent rescue emergency stenting. Patients treated with SES or BMS were compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting. The primary outcome was the final reperfusion as measured by the modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) Scale. Safety measures included rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, procedural complications, and 90-day mortality. Results A total of 328 patients were included. Baseline clinical and procedural characteristics were well balanced among both groups. The BMS group (n=127) had higher rates of successful reperfusion (94.5% vs 86.6%, aOR=4.23, 95% CI 1.57 to 11.37, P=0.004) and increased likelihood of higher degree of final reperfusion on the mTICI Scale (acOR=2.06, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.57, P=0.01) than the SES group (n=201). No difference in modified Rankin Scale shift (acOR=0.98, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.79, P=0.95), rates of mRS0-2 (26% vs 36%, aOR=0.93, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.88, P=0.83) and mRS0-3 (43% vs 50%, aOR=0.92, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.66, P=0.77) at 90 days were noted. Safety measures were comparable in both groups. Conclusion The present study demonstrates higher reperfusion rates with BMS than with SES in failed thrombectomy procedures that involved rescue stenting. No differences in hemorrhagic complications or clinical outcomes were noted. Further larger controlled studies are warranted.

Publication metrics

Metrics

Scopus
citations

PlumX, opens in new tab

Captures
7
Citation count
3