ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026A672 PROXIMAL FLOW ARREST USING BALLOON GUIDE CATHETER IN ENDOVASCULAR THROMBECTOMY (PROACT): INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPANT DATA META-ANALYSIS OF TWO RANDOMIZED TRIALS

Abstract Background and aims Proximal flow arrest using a balloon-guide catheter (BGC) is recommended during endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke due to large-vessel occlusion, but recent randomized trials have yielded conflicting results. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of proximal flow arrest with BGC vs. non–flow-arrest in patients undergoing endovascular thrombectomy. Methods Systematic search of PubMed and Medline from inception to August 1, 2025 was conducted to include randomized clinical trials comparing endovascular thrombectomy with vs. without proximal flow arrest using a BGC.Both eligible trials provided complete Individual participant data, which were harmonized and analyzed using one-stage mixed-effects models. The primary outcome was functional disability at 90 days, assessed by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) using a mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression model. Results Two trials (PROTECT-MT and ProFATE-MT) with 463 patients were included (232 assigned to BGC with flow arrest, 231 to non–flow-arrest). Variability between studies was small. Median 90-day mRS was 4 (IQR 2–5) with flow arrest and 3 (IQR 2–5) with non–flow arrest (adjusted common OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.60–1.14). Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage and mortality did not differ significantly. Subgroup analysis suggested onset-to-randomization time modified the effect (p for interaction=0.032): BGC tended toward worse outcomes when randomized >6 h from symptom onset, whereas outcomes were comparable otherwise. Conclusions In this IPD meta-analysis of randomized trials, proximal flow arrest using a BGC provided no overall benefit compared with non-flow arrest. Future studies were needed to assess whether newer-generation devices or more selective indications might provide clinical benefit. Conflict of interest All authors: nothing to disclose

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Stroke Journal
Published
2026-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/esj/aakag023.387
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

ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026A672 PROXIMAL FLOW ARREST USING BALLOON GUIDE CATHETER IN ENDOVASCULAR THROMBECTOMY (PROACT): INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPANT DATA META-ANALYSIS OF TWO RANDOMIZED TRIALS

P Dhillon, Yi Zhou, J W Liu, H Y Ma et al.
European Stroke Journal
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
article

ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026A672 PROXIMAL FLOW ARREST USING BALLOON GUIDE CATHETER IN ENDOVASCULAR THROMBECTOMY (PROACT): INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPANT DATA META-ANALYSIS OF TWO RANDOMIZED TRIALS

P Dhillon, Yi Zhou, J W Liu, H Y Ma, Pengfei Yang, Lei Zhang, Zifu Li, Tim England
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background and aims Proximal flow arrest using a balloon-guide catheter (BGC) is recommended during endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke due to large-vessel occlusion, but recent randomized trials have yielded conflicting results. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of proximal flow arrest with BGC vs. non–flow-arrest in patients undergoing endovascular thrombectomy. Methods Systematic search of PubMed and Medline from inception to August 1, 2025 was conducted to include randomized clinical trials comparing endovascular thrombectomy with vs. without proximal flow arrest using a BGC.Both eligible trials provided complete Individual participant data, which were harmonized and analyzed using one-stage mixed-effects models. The primary outcome was functional disability at 90 days, assessed by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) using a mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression model. Results Two trials (PROTECT-MT and ProFATE-MT) with 463 patients were included (232 assigned to BGC with flow arrest, 231 to non–flow-arrest). Variability between studies was small. Median 90-day mRS was 4 (IQR 2–5) with flow arrest and 3 (IQR 2–5) with non–flow arrest (adjusted common OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.60–1.14). Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage and mortality did not differ significantly. Subgroup analysis suggested onset-to-randomization time modified the effect (p for interaction=0.032): BGC tended toward worse outcomes when randomized >6 h from symptom onset, whereas outcomes were comparable otherwise. Conclusions In this IPD meta-analysis of randomized trials, proximal flow arrest using a BGC provided no overall benefit compared with non-flow arrest. Future studies were needed to assess whether newer-generation devices or more selective indications might provide clinical benefit. Conflict of interest All authors: nothing to disclose

European Stroke JournalVol. 11(Supplement_1)
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust (GB), Second Military Medical University (CN), Changhai Hospital (CN), University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
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.