PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Hofmeister, Jeremy AU - Bernava, Gianmarco AU - Rosi, Andrea AU - Reymond, Philippe AU - Brina, Olivier AU - Muster, Michel AU - Lovblad, Karl-Olof AU - Machi, Paolo TI - Benchtop evaluation of a double stent retriever thrombectomy technique for acute ischemic stroke treatment AID - 10.1101/2022.10.12.22280760 DP - 2022 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2022.10.12.22280760 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/10/13/2022.10.12.22280760.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/10/13/2022.10.12.22280760.full AB - Background A mechanical thrombectomy technique using a double stent retriever (DSR) approach has been reported for the treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke. The purpose of this study was to perform a benchtop evaluation of the mechanism of action and efficacy of a DSR approach compared to a single stent retriever approach.Methods In vitro mechanical thrombectomy procedures were performed in a vascular phantom reproducing a M1-M2 occlusion with two different clot analog consistencies (soft and hard). We compared the DSR approach to the single stent retriever approach and recorded the recanalisation rate, distal embolization, and retrieval forces of each mechanical thrombectomy procedure.Results The DSR approach achieved a higher recanalization rate and lower embolic complications compared to the single stent retriever approach. This seems to stem from two facts: the greater probability of targeting the correct artery with two stents in the case of bifurcation occlusion, and an improved clot capture mechanism using the DSR approach. However, the DSR was associated with an increased initial retrieval force.Conclusion In vitro evaluation of the mechanism of action of the DSR provided explanations that appear to support the high efficacy of such an approach in patient cohorts and could help operators when selecting the optimal mechanical thrombectomy strategy in cases of arterial occlusions difficult to treat with a single stent retriever.Competing Interest StatementPM reports consultancy for Medtronic and Stryker. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding this article.Funding StatementThis work has been supported by Swiss National Science Foundation grant nos. 320030_188942 2 and 32003B_182382. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.