Background: The inadvertent detachment of stent retrievers during mechanical thrombectomy is an extremely rare but feared complication associated with poor clinical outcomes. We discuss management considerations after an unexpected disconnection of the pRESET stent retriever during mechanical thrombectomy, based on clinical experience and mechanical and phantom studies. Methods: We present a clinical course of rare accidents of stent-retriever separation inside an intracranial vessel that occurred in patients in a comprehensive stroke centre between 2018 and 2020. We designed a phantom study to assess the Tigertriever’s ability to remove a detached stent retriever from intercranial vessels. In the mechanical study, several types of stent retrievers were evaluated in order to find the weakest point at which detachment occurred. Results: Two patients (~0.7%) with inadvertent stent-retriever detachment were found in our database. Failed attempts of endovascular removal with no recanalization at the end of procedure were reported in both cases. mRS after 3 months was three and four respectively. In the mechanical study, the Tigertriever was the most resistant to detachment and was followed by Embotrap > pRESET > 3D Separator. In the phantom study, the pRESET device detached in a configuration resembling the M1 segment was successfully removed with the Tigertriever. Conclusions: Conservative management of the inadvertent detachment of stent retrievers during mechanical thrombectomy in large vessel occlusion may be acceptable in order to avoid further periprocedural complications after unsuccessful device removal attempts. Based on the phantom and mechanical studies, the Tigertriever may be a useful tool for the removal of detached pRESET devices.
Comment on ‘Consequences of progressive eclogitization on crustal exhumation, a mechanical study’ by H. Raimbourg, L. Jolivet and Y. Leroy