Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 1, 2025

Prehospital Thrombolysis: A Manual from Berlin
Published on: November 26, 2013
Middle Cerebral Artery M2 Thrombectomy: Safety and Technical Considerations in the German Stroke Registry (GSR)
Moriz Herzberg1,2, Franziska Dorn3, Christoph Trumm1
1Institute of Neuroradiology, Ludwig Maximilian University (LMU), 80539 Munich, Germany.
Abstract:
There is ongoing debate concerning the safety and efficacy of various mechanical thrombectomy (MT) approaches for M2 occlusions. We compared these for MT in M2 versus M1 occlusions. Subgroup analyses of different technical approaches within the M2 MT cohort were also performed. Patients were included from the German Stroke Registry (GSR), a multicenter registry of consecutive MT patients. Primary outcomes were reperfusion success events. Secondary outcomes were early clinical improvement (improvement in NIHSS score > 4) and independent survival at 90 days (mRS 0−2). Out of 3804 patients, 2689 presented with M1 (71%) and 1115 with isolated M2 occlusions (29%). The mean age was 76 (CI 65−82) and 77 (CI 66−83) years, respectively. Except for baseline NIHSS (15 (CI 10−18) vs. 11 (CI 6−16), p < 0.001) and ASPECTS (9 (CI 7−10) vs. 9 (CI 8−10, p < 0.001), baseline demographics were balanced. Apart from a more frequent use of dedicated small vessel stent retrievers (svSR) in M2 (17.4% vs. 3.0; p < 0.001), intraprocedural aspects were balanced. There was no difference in ICH at 24 h (11%; p = 1.0), adverse events (14.4% vs. 18.1%; p = 0.63), clinical improvement (62.5% vs. 61.4 %; p = 0.57), mortality (26.9% vs. 22.9%; p = 0.23). In M2 MT, conventional stent retriever (cSR) achieved higher rates of mTICI3 (54.0% vs. 37.7−42.0%; p < 0.001), requiring more MT-maneuvers (7, CI 2−8) vs. 2 (CI 2−7)/(CI 2−2); p < 0.001) and without impact on efficacy and outcome. Real-life MT in M2 can be performed with equal safety and efficacy as in M1 occlusions. Different recanalization techniques including the use of svSR did not result in significant differences regarding safety, efficacy and outcome.
Insights
Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) for M2 occlusions is as safe and effective as for M1 occlusions. Different techniques, including small vessel stent retrievers, showed comparable outcomes in real-world stroke treatment.
Area of Science:
- Neurology
- Interventional Neurology
- Vascular Neurology
Background:
- Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is a key treatment for acute ischemic stroke.
- Debate exists regarding the optimal MT approach for M2 occlusions compared to M1 occlusions.
- Real-world data on the safety and efficacy of MT for M2 occlusions is crucial.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the safety and efficacy of MT for M2 occlusions versus M1 occlusions.
- To perform subgroup analyses of different technical approaches within the M2 MT cohort.
- To evaluate reperfusion success, early clinical improvement, and 90-day independent survival.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 3804 consecutive MT patients from the German Stroke Registry (GSR).
- Comparison of outcomes between patients with M1 occlusions (n=2689) and isolated M2 occlusions (n=1115).
- Subgroup analyses of technical approaches within the M2 cohort, including conventional stent retrievers (cSR) and small vessel stent retrievers (svSR).
Main Results:
- Baseline demographics were balanced, except for NIHSS and ASPECTS scores.
- No significant differences were observed in 24-hour intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), adverse events, clinical improvement, or mortality between M1 and M2 groups.
- Conventional stent retrievers (cSR) in M2 MT achieved higher mTICI3 reperfusion rates than svSR, but required more maneuvers without impacting outcomes.
Conclusions:
- Real-world MT for M2 occlusions demonstrates equal safety and efficacy compared to M1 occlusions.
- Various recanalization techniques, including svSR, do not significantly alter safety, efficacy, or patient outcomes.
- MT is a viable and effective treatment option for M2 occlusions, comparable to M1 occlusions.

