Evaluation of CATCHVIEW Versus Standard Stent Retrievers for Endovascular Therapy: Results From the ETIS Registry

• Published in: Stroke: vascular and interventional neurology 2022-11, Vol.2 (6)
• Main Authors: Maïer, Benjamin, Blanc, Raphaël, Labreuche, Julien, Piotin, Michel, Gory, Benjamin, Bourcier, Romain, Marnat, Gaultier, Consoli, Arturo, Lapergue, Bertrand
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: disability; reperfusion; stent; stroke
• ISSN: 2694-5746; 2694-5746
• DOI: 10.1161/SVIN.121.000314

BackgroundThe CATCHVIEW device (Balt) is a last‐generation stent retriever designed for endovascular therapy. We aimed to compare the CATCHVIEW device with standard stent retrievers (SSRs) using propensity score methods and assess the noninferiority of CATCHVIEW versus SSRs.MethodsWe used the ETIS (Endovascular Treatment in Ischemic Stroke) multicenter (13 centers), prospective registry to compare clinical and radiological data of patients treated with CATCHVIEW or SSRs as a first‐line strategy. Procedural outcomes (successful, near‐perfect, perfect reperfusion after first‐line strategy, and at the end of endovascular therapy), clinical outcomes (modified Rankin Scale at 90 days), and safety outcomes (symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, mortality at 90 days) were compared after propensity score matching. Noninferiority of CATCHVIEW was established if the prespecified lower bound of the 95% CI was >−10%.ResultsFrom March 2017 to March 2020, 171 patients treated first‐line by CATCHVIEW were matched to 617 patients treated first‐line by an SSR. In the propensity score–matched cohort, successful reperfusion after first‐line strategy was achieved in 73.9% and 76.2% in the CATCHVIEW and SSR groups, respectively (absolute difference, −2.3%; 1‐sided 95% CI, −7.0% to ∞), demonstrating noninferiority of CATCHVIEW versus SSR. CATCHVIEW was associated with better near‐perfect (matched relative risk, 1.15; [95% CI, 1.00–1.31]) and perfect (matched relative risk, 1.26; [95% CI, 1.07–1.47]) reperfusion rates at the end of endovascular therapy and favorable 90‐day outcomes (matched relative risk, 1.27; [95% CI, 1.03–1.55]). Safety outcomes were comparable.ConclusionsIn this propensity score–matched cohort, we demonstrated the noninferiority of CATCHVIEW compared with SSR, as the first‐line strategy for successful reperfusion. CATCHVIEW achieved higher reperfusion rates at the end of endovascular therapy and higher rates of favorable outcomes at 90 days.