Abstract
Background and purpose
Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is the gold standard for treating large vessel occlusions. Given the variability in vessel anatomy among patients and the sometimes arbitrary selection of devices by neurointerventionalists, the choice of microcatheter size requires thorough evaluation. We aim to evaluate the impact of device-to-vessel size ratio on periprocedural distal embolization.
Materials and methods
Fragment-prone clot analogs (length = 9.86±0.07 mm) were used to embolize three different vessels (lumen = 2.0, 2.5, 3.5 mm) in a three-dimensional-printed neurovascular model. Three different microcatheter sizes (0.017″, 0.021″, 0.027″) were used to cross the lesion and subsequently, migrated clot fragments were collected in an outflow filter for image analysis. Experiments were conducted both with and without a microguidewire. A total of 180 experiments were performed: 60 for each M1 segment of middle cerebral artery size, including 20 for each microcatheter—10 with J-shaped microguidewire and 10 without.
Results
Across all vessels, the 0.027″ microcatheter caused more distal embolizations compared to 0.017″ (p = 0.04) and 0.021″ (p = 0.01). In the 2 mm M1-MCA, 0.017″ microcatheter reduced emboli compared to 0.021″ (p = 0.062) and 0.027″ (p = 0.017). Procedures in the 2 mm vessel are significantly more prone to embolization compared to larger M1 segments (p < 0.05). Microcatheter-to-vessel ratio ≥0.38 significantly increases risk of distal embolization. The use of microguidewire in the procedures did not have any impact on distal embolization (p = 0.871).
Conclusion
A larger device-to-vessel size ratio induces an increase in distal embolization. Neurointerventionalists should carefully consider vessel anatomy for appropriate microcatheter size selection to minimize the risk of distal embolization.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
