Frontiers in neurology · 2026
Temporary flow arrest using EMBOGUARD™ balloon guide catheter may improve functional outcomes in acute stroke thrombectomy: a multicenter retrospective study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Morsi Rami Z, Falk Sophia, Badillo Goicoechea Elena, Jaro Taraf, Baskaran Archit B, Thind Sonam, Trad Khalid, Khaldi Ahmad, El-Ghawanmeh Reem, Inoa Violiza, AlMajali Mohammad H, Chaudhari Amit, Ashouri Yazan, Zaidat Osama O, Mirza Mahmood, Mehendale Rachel, Siegler James E, Mansour Ali, Prabhakaran Shyam, Kass-Hout Tareq
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Balloon guide catheters (BGCs) have demonstrated benefits in mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS), including improved recanalization rates and reduced distal embolization. The EMBOGUARD™ balloon guide catheter (Johnson & Johnson Neurovascular, Irvine, CA) represents a novel design with enhanced flexibility and compatibility with large-bore aspiration catheters. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the EMBOGUARD™ BGC compared with non-BGC approaches.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective multicenter study to analyze patients with AIS due to anterior large vessel occlusions (LVOs) who underwent MT between January 2022 and December 2024. Patients were divided into two groups: those treated with t☺he EMBOGUARD™ BGC and those treated without BGC. Primary outcomes included first-pass effect (FPE), successful recanalization (mTICI ≥2b), procedural time, number of passes, and distal embolization. Secondary outcomes included 90-day functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0-2), mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH).
RESULTS: A total of 178 patients were included (EMBOGUARD: n = 135, 75.8%; non-BGC: n = 43, 24.2%). The EMBOGUARD™ group demonstrated comparable rates of FPE (33.3% vs. 37.2%, p = 0.68) and successful recanalization (86.7% vs. 86.0%, p = 0.92). Procedural time was significantly shorter in the EMBOGUARD™ group (median 32 min vs. 49 min, p = 0.004). Distal embolization rates were similar between groups (4.4% vs. 4.7%, p = 1.00). The EMBOGUARD™ group showed significantly higher rates of favorable functional outcome at 90 days (48.6% vs. 28.1%, p = 0.04) and non-significantly lower 90-day mortality (13.7% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.6). Although favorably trending, multivariate logistic regression analysis did not confirm that EMBOGUARD™ was associated with greater odds of FPE (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-6.41, p = 0.2), mRS 0-2 at 90 days (aOR 1.36, 95% CI 0.35-5.34, p = 0.7) or lower odds of mortality at 90 days (aOR 0.32, 95% CI 0.05-1.85, p = 0.2).
CONCLUSION: The EMBOGUARD™ balloon guide catheter demonstrated comparable technical efficacy with reduced procedural times and improved clinical outcomes compared with non-BGC techniques in endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke. These findings support the use of EMBOGUARD™ as a reasonable tool for flow arrest in stroke intervention.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective multicenter study to analyze patients with AIS due to anterior large vessel occlusions (LVOs) who underwent MT between January 2022 and December 2024. Patients were divided into two groups: those treated with t☺he EMBOGUARD™ BGC and those treated without BGC. Primary outcomes included first-pass effect (FPE), successful recanalization (mTICI ≥2b), procedural time, number of passes, and distal embolization. Secondary outcomes included 90-day functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0-2), mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH).
RESULTS: A total of 178 patients were included (EMBOGUARD: n = 135, 75.8%; non-BGC: n = 43, 24.2%). The EMBOGUARD™ group demonstrated comparable rates of FPE (33.3% vs. 37.2%, p = 0.68) and successful recanalization (86.7% vs. 86.0%, p = 0.92). Procedural time was significantly shorter in the EMBOGUARD™ group (median 32 min vs. 49 min, p = 0.004). Distal embolization rates were similar between groups (4.4% vs. 4.7%, p = 1.00). The EMBOGUARD™ group showed significantly higher rates of favorable functional outcome at 90 days (48.6% vs. 28.1%, p = 0.04) and non-significantly lower 90-day mortality (13.7% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.6). Although favorably trending, multivariate logistic regression analysis did not confirm that EMBOGUARD™ was associated with greater odds of FPE (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-6.41, p = 0.2), mRS 0-2 at 90 days (aOR 1.36, 95% CI 0.35-5.34, p = 0.7) or lower odds of mortality at 90 days (aOR 0.32, 95% CI 0.05-1.85, p = 0.2).
CONCLUSION: The EMBOGUARD™ balloon guide catheter demonstrated comparable technical efficacy with reduced procedural times and improved clinical outcomes compared with non-BGC techniques in endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke. These findings support the use of EMBOGUARD™ as a reasonable tool for flow arrest in stroke intervention.