Skip to main content
NeuroWiki
Thrombectomy

ASTER Trial: Contact Aspiration vs Stent Retriever Revascularization

In patients with anterior circulation LVO treated within 6 hours, does first-line contact aspiration produce higher rates of successful revascularization than first-line stent retriever?

Lapergue et al. (JAMA 2017) · doi:10.1001/jama.2017.9644 · 381 patients

Population

Included

  • Age 18 years or older
  • Acute ischemic stroke with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion (ICA, M1, or M2)
  • Groin puncture initiable within 6 hours of symptom onset
  • NIHSS 6 or greater
  • Pre-stroke mRS 0 or 1

Excluded

  • Posterior circulation occlusion
  • Pre-existing functional disability
  • Contraindication to general anesthesia or sedation
  • Tandem cervical lesion requiring stenting
  • Life expectancy under 6 months

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02523261· Retrieved 2026-06-08

Primary Outcome — Successful Revascularization (mTICI 2b-3)

Procedural endpoint — not a clinical outcome measure

Procedural endpoint, not clinical outcome

The chart shows end-of-procedure revascularization rates, not 90-day disability. mRS 0-2 at 90 days was 45.3% (aspiration) vs 50.3% (stent retriever); P = 0.19. No significant clinical difference between strategies.

Contact Aspiration First Line
85 / 100
Stent Retriever First Line
83 / 100

Small absolute difference — interpret with caution

mTICI 2b-3 Revascularization

Risk ratio RD +2.3 pp95% CI p = 0.53

Study Arms

Agent
Direct aspiration first-pass technique (ADAPT): large-bore aspiration catheter, first-line
Route
Endovascular (transfemoral)
Co-interventions
IV thrombolysis (alteplase) first if eligible, then transfer to angiography; long sheath in distal cervical vasculature; aspiration catheter advanced to proximal thrombus with continuous aspiration; GA or conscious sedation per operator; ≥3 attempts with assigned technique required before switching (rescue at operator discretion: stent retriever, combined, or angioplasty±stenting).

Aspiration-first arm, n=192; rescue stent retriever in 25.2%. Lapergue JAMA 2017 Methods p.444-445.

Trial Design

Type

  • Randomized open-label, blinded endpoint trial
  • First-line contact aspiration vs first-line stent retriever
  • Anterior circulation LVO within 6 hours
  • Conducted in 8 French comprehensive stroke centers

Timeline

Enrolled 2015-2016

N

381

Enrollment

French multicenter randomized open-label blinded-endpoint (PROBE) trial enrolling 381 patients at 8 comprehensive stroke centers between 2015 and 2016 (Lapergue JAMA 2017).

ClinicalTrials.gov

NCT02523261

Bedside Pearl

ASTER showed no significant difference between aspiration-first and stent-retriever-first for revascularization or 90-day outcomes, but rescue device use was 25.2% in the aspiration arm. Choice of first-line technique is operator-dependent; readiness to switch techniques is part of getting equivalent outcomes.

NeuroWiki is a clinical reference. It does not substitute for your clinical judgment, current guidelines, or your institution's protocol. Verify before acting. Do not enter patient names, MRNs, or dates of birth. Privacy Policy