Influence of recent randomized MeVO trials on current practice patterns and future role of MeVO thrombectomy

IntroductionNumerous non-randomized studies suggest the benefit of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for medium vessel occlusion (MeVO) stroke, while recent randomized trials showed no benefit. In clinical practice, MeVO management remains heterogeneous. We gauged the current status quo of endovascular MeVO management and physicians' perspectives on future MeVO-EVT trials.MethodsInternational, cross-sectional survey study inquiring about practice patterns before and after publication of the MeVO trials, opinions on the design of second-generation MeVO trials, willingness to enroll in such trials, and personal opinions regarding optimal MeVO treatment strategies. Participants' anonymized responses were summarized using descriptive statistics.ResultsFour hundred fifty-six physicians responded to the survey (308 China, 55 North America, 48 Europe, and 45 other countries). 86/454 (18.9%) respondents reported treating more MeVOs with EVT since the recent MeVO-EVT trials, and 134/454 (29.5%) reported treating fewer. Four-hundred-sixteen of 454 (91.6%) reported that their willingness to enroll patients in a second-generation MeVO-EVT trial increased (282/454 [62.1%]) or remained the same (134/454 [29.5%]) compared to before the recent trial publications. Of 122/454 (26.9%) respondents who participated in a MeVO-EVT trial, 79/121 (65.3%) stated that enrolment bias occurred at their sites. Three hundred twelve of 454 (68.7%) respondents (271/378 [71.7%] interventionalists, 41/76 [53.9%] non-interventionalists, <i>p</i> = 0.004) expressed belief in EVT benefit despite the neutral trial results. Adjunct intra-arterial thrombolysis was anticipated to play a major role in future MeVO treatment by 290/454 (63.9%).ConclusionMost physicians think that EVT is beneficial in selected MeVO patients. Enrolment bias was thought to be a major contributor to the neutral trial results. Ninety percent were equally or more willing to enroll patients in a second-generation MeVO-EVT trial. Adjunctive intra-arterial thrombolytics were identified as a key strategy for future MeVO-EVT.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Interventional Neuroradiology
Published
2025-10-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199251389060
Primary Topic
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Influence of recent randomized MeVO trials on current practice patterns and future role of MeVO thrombectomy

Andrew M. Demchuk, Johanna Maria Ospel, Aravind Ganesh, Mohammed Almekhlafi et al.
Interventional Neuroradiology
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
article

Influence of recent randomized MeVO trials on current practice patterns and future role of MeVO thrombectomy

Andrew M. Demchuk, Johanna Maria Ospel, Aravind Ganesh, Mohammed Almekhlafi, Nishita Singh, Nima Kashani, Mayank Goyal, Bijoy K. Menon, Alexander Stebner, Jianmin Liu, Michael D. Hill, Salome Lou Bosshart, Yu Zhou
article en

Abstract

IntroductionNumerous non-randomized studies suggest the benefit of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for medium vessel occlusion (MeVO) stroke, while recent randomized trials showed no benefit. In clinical practice, MeVO management remains heterogeneous. We gauged the current status quo of endovascular MeVO management and physicians' perspectives on future MeVO-EVT trials.MethodsInternational, cross-sectional survey study inquiring about practice patterns before and after publication of the MeVO trials, opinions on the design of second-generation MeVO trials, willingness to enroll in such trials, and personal opinions regarding optimal MeVO treatment strategies. Participants' anonymized responses were summarized using descriptive statistics.ResultsFour hundred fifty-six physicians responded to the survey (308 China, 55 North America, 48 Europe, and 45 other countries). 86/454 (18.9%) respondents reported treating more MeVOs with EVT since the recent MeVO-EVT trials, and 134/454 (29.5%) reported treating fewer. Four-hundred-sixteen of 454 (91.6%) reported that their willingness to enroll patients in a second-generation MeVO-EVT trial increased (282/454 [62.1%]) or remained the same (134/454 [29.5%]) compared to before the recent trial publications. Of 122/454 (26.9%) respondents who participated in a MeVO-EVT trial, 79/121 (65.3%) stated that enrolment bias occurred at their sites. Three hundred twelve of 454 (68.7%) respondents (271/378 [71.7%] interventionalists, 41/76 [53.9%] non-interventionalists, <i>p</i> = 0.004) expressed belief in EVT benefit despite the neutral trial results. Adjunct intra-arterial thrombolysis was anticipated to play a major role in future MeVO treatment by 290/454 (63.9%).ConclusionMost physicians think that EVT is beneficial in selected MeVO patients. Enrolment bias was thought to be a major contributor to the neutral trial results. Ninety percent were equally or more willing to enroll patients in a second-generation MeVO-EVT trial. Adjunctive intra-arterial thrombolytics were identified as a key strategy for future MeVO-EVT.

Interventional Neuroradiology
University of Calgary (CA), Second Military Medical University (CN), University of Basel (CH), Foothills Medical Centre (CA), University Hospital of Basel (CH), Changhai Hospital (CN), University of Manitoba (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.