Adiyaman H. B., Kocabaş Z. U., Aykac O., Özdemir A. Ö.
FRONTIERS IN NEUROLOGY, cilt.17, ss.1-8, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
-
Yayın Türü:
Makale / Tam Makale
-
Cilt numarası:
17
-
Basım Tarihi:
2026
-
Doi Numarası:
10.3389/fneur.2026.1867575
-
Dergi Adı:
FRONTIERS IN NEUROLOGY
-
Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler:
Scopus, Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), EMBASE, Psycinfo, Directory of Open Access Journals
-
Sayfa Sayıları:
ss.1-8
-
Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Adresli:
Evet
Özet
Background and purpose
The clinical and procedural benefits of balloon guide catheter (BGC) use during mechanical thrombectomy remain debated, and whether these associations vary by occlusion location is uncertain. We evaluated the association of BGC use with thrombectomy outcomes and examined potential effect modification by occlusion location.
Methods
We retrospectively analyzed 475 patients with anterior-circulation large-vessel occlusion undergoing mechanical thrombectomy (BGC,
n
=242; non-BGC,
n
=233). Procedural, angiographic, and clinical outcomes were compared between groups. Multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, baseline NIHSS, collateral status, occlusion location, atrial fibrillation, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and coronary artery disease. BGC × occlusion-location interactions were assessed using adjusted generalized linear models.
Results
BGC use was independently associated with higher odds of 90-day functional independence (mRS 0–2; adjusted OR [aOR], 1.61; 95% CI, 1.05–2.48;
p
=0.029) and lower odds of embolization to new territory (aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.35–0.81;
p
=0.004). BGC use was also associated with higher odds of vasospasm (aOR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.09–2.58;
p
=0.018), whereas associations with first-pass recanalization and hemorrhagic complications were not significant. No significant BGC × occlusion-location interaction was observed for any evaluated outcome (all P for interaction>0.05).
Conclusion
BGC use was independently associated with favorable 90-day functional outcome and reduced embolization to new territory, but with increased vasospasm. No evidence of effect modification by occlusion location was identified. These findings support potential overall benefits of BGC use while emphasizing that location-specific effects remain unproven and require prospective evaluation.