Feedbacks from the LINNC online community

We asked you some questions about mechanical thrombectomies failures. What are the failure rates reported by you, physicians, in real-life setting? What do you expect from future developments?

Q1. What is your current failure rate for mechanical thrombectomy (MT)?

In real-life setting, members of the LINNC online community have reported more frequent failures than in published series of mechanical thrombectomies, with an average failure rate of 22% here.

Q2. What are the two main causes of MT failure?

The two main sources of problems reported when performing a mechanical thrombectomy were “Access” and “Tough Clots”.

Q3. Two words to describe how you personally feel after a MT failure?

It is interesting to note that, in case of failure, the first feeling that comes physicians minds is frustration, as if we were close to achieving even better results, perhaps with better tools.

Q4. What do you expect from future technological developments?

Logically, as physicians indicated that “tough clots” were the main factor for failure of mechanical thrombectomy, most respondents (40%) expect the industry to develop stent-retrievers specially designed for tough clots.

Supported by 

RETURN TO THE SPECIAL REPORT