Passive advancement describes the antegrade movement of the aspiration catheter that occurs when the inner delivery device is withdrawn and the catheter advances without active forward force from the operator. This physical phenomenon is observed during mechanical thrombectomy for acute large-vessel occlusion and has been anecdotally linked to improved recanalization outcomes. The study reviewed here characterizes the prevalence of passive advancement and examines its associations with recanalization endpoints.
Investigators performed a retrospective review of consecutive thrombectomy procedures at two high-volume stroke centers covering the interval January 2019 through December 2025. Stored fluoroscopy and angiographic images were reviewed to determine whether passive advancement occurred on a per-pass basis and to document the final catheter tip position relative to arterial branch points.
The analysis included 1,824 total device passes recorded across 995 consecutive patients with 1,027 occlusions. Of these passes, 733 had imaging of sufficient quality to assess for passive advancement and catheter tip position. Outcomes evaluated included final reperfusion by expanded Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (eTICI) grades, first-pass effect (FPE; eTICI ≥2c-3), modified FPE (mFPE; eTICI ≥2b-3), secondary occlusion, and procedural complications. The authors used mixed-effects multivariable regression for per-pass and per-vessel analyses to identify independent associations with these outcomes.
From the 733 passes with adequate imaging, passive advancement was identified in 525 passes (71.6%). In 306 of the 733 assessable passes (41.7%), passive advancement progressed to an arterial branch point.
Per-pass comparisons reported in the source excerpt include the following clear figures:
eTICI ≥2b-3 occurred in 71.0% of passes with passive advancement versus 19.7% of passes without passive advancement.
eTICI ≥2c-3 occurred in 57.5% of passes with passive advancement versus 10.1% without.
When passive advancement reached an arterial branch point, the reported rates were higher:
eTICI ≥2b-3: 90.5% with branch advancement versus 32.1% without branch advancement.
eTICI ≥2c-3: 79.4% with branch advancement versus 18.7% without.
The provided source text indicates these differences were statistically compared, but the excerpt in this record is truncated and the exact p values and full multivariable model results are not completely reported here. The authors state that passive advancement was independently associated with superior reperfusion outcomes in multivariable analyses, and they report associations with FPE and mFPE in per-vessel models; however, the numerical effect sizes and confidence intervals for those multivariable results are not shown in the supplied text.
In this retrospective cohort from two high-volume centers, passive advancement of the aspiration catheter during mechanical thrombectomy was common (observed in 71.6% of assessable passes) and was associated with substantially higher rates of successful reperfusion by eTICI criteria on unadjusted per-pass comparisons. Advancement to a branch point correlated with still higher eTICI ≥2b-3 and ≥2c-3 rates.
Authors conclude that passive advancement is independently associated with superior recanalization outcomes and suggest it should be considered a technical objective during aspiration thrombectomy procedures. The statement in the source text that passive advancement should be a technical objective is an interpretation by the study authors based on their observational findings.
Key limitations inherent to the dataset and to the reporting in the supplied excerpt include its retrospective design and the fact that only 733 of 1,824 passes had imaging adequate for passive advancement assessment. The supplied source material is truncated in places: specific p values comparing groups and complete multivariable model coefficients, odds ratios, and confidence intervals are not fully reported in the excerpt available here.
The authors indicate that data supporting the study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request, subject to institutional IRB approval and applicable privacy regulations.
Several authors reported financial relationships with device and software companies, including consulting fees, equity, honoraria, travel reimbursements, and research grants. Specific disclosures listed in the source include consulting and equity relationships with Certus Critical Care, Route 92 Medical, Stryker, Medtronic, Piraeus Medical, Galaxy Therapeutics, RapidAI, Penumbra, and others for named authors. Several authors reported no competing interests.
The manuscript is a preprint that had not been peer reviewed at the time of posting. The authors state that relevant IRB and ethics approvals were obtained and that participant consent procedures and reporting checklists were followed. The supplied text notes that the preprint should not yet be used to guide clinical practice.