Search

Rationale Mechanical thrombectomy with a stent retriever is now the standard of care in anterior circulation ischemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion. New techniques for mechanical thrombectomy, such as contact aspiration, appear promising to increase reperfusion status and improve clinical outcome. Aim We aim at ascertaining whether contact aspiration is more efficient than the stent retriever as a first-line endovascular procedure. Sample size estimates With a two-sided test (alpha = 5%, power = 90%) and an anticipated rate of spontaneous recanalization and catheterization failures of 15%, we estimate that a sample size of 380 patients will be necessary to detect an absolute difference of 15% in primary outcome (superiority design). Methods and design The ASTER trial is a prospective, randomized, multicenter, controlled, open-label, blinded end-point clinical trial. Patients admitted with suspected ischemic anterior circulation stroke secondary to large vessel occlusion, with onset of symptoms Study outcomes The primary outcome will be successful recanalization (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score 2b–3) at the end of the endovascular procedures. Secondary outcome will include successful recanalization after the assigned first-line treatment technique alone, procedural times, the need for a rescue technique, complications and modified Rankin Scale at three months. Discussion No previous head to head randomized trials have directly compared contact aspiration versus stent retriever reperfusion techniques. This prospective trial aims to provide further evidence of benefit of contact aspiration versus stent retriever techniques among patients with ischemic stroke.

Background Hemorrhagic transformation (HT) is a complication of stroke [1] that can occur spontaneously or after treatment. We aimed to assess the interrater and intrarater reliability of HT diagnosis. Methods Studies assessing the reliability of the European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study (ECASS) classification [2] of HT or of the presence (yes/no) of HT were systematically reviewed. Eighteen raters independently examined 30 post-thrombectomy [3] computed tomography scans selected from the Aspiration versus Stentriever (ASTER) trial [4] . They were asked whether there was HT (yes/no), what the ECASS classification of the particular scan (0/HI1/HI2/PH1/PH2) was, and whether they would prescribe an antiplatelet agent if it was otherwise indicated. Agreement [5] was measured with Fleiss’ and Cohen's kappa statistics. Results The systematic review yielded 4 studies involving few (≤ 3) raters with heterogeneous results. In our 18-rater study, agreement for the presence of HT was moderate (κ=0.55, 95%CI [0.41–0.68]). Agreement for ECASS classification was only fair for all 5 categories, but agreement improved to substantial (k = 0.72, 95%CI [0.69-0.75]) after dichotomizing ECASS into 0/HI1/HI2/PH1 versus PH2. The interrater agreement for the decision to reintroduce antiplatelet therapy was moderate for all raters, but substantial among vascular neurologists (κ=0.70 [0.57–0.84]). Conclusion The ECASS classification may involve too many categories and the diagnosis of HT may not be easily replicable, except in the presence of a large parenchymal hematoma. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique identifier: NCT02523261 .