Skip to main content
INVAMED
HomeINVAblogStent retriever or Contact aspiration? A Technical Comparison
Neurovascular InterventionsJune 3, 2026INVAMED Medical Affairs

Stent retriever or Contact aspiration? A Technical Comparison

Stent retriever vs Contact aspiration: a balanced, educational comparison of how each works, their trade-offs, and how INVAMED supports both — not medical…

This article compares two approaches side by side to clarify how they differ in principle and practice. Mechanical thrombectomy removes the clot with a catheter-based device, and it is used in selected patients alongside or after intravenous thrombolysis where indicated. As a medical device manufacturer, INVAMED develops technologies in this area; the information here is educational and not medical advice.

Background: Acute Ischemic Stroke and Intracranial Aneurysm Intervention

Mechanical thrombectomy removes the clot with a catheter-based device, and it is used in selected patients alongside or after intravenous thrombolysis where indicated. Intracranial aneurysms are focal outpouchings of a brain artery wall, and endovascular options aim to seal the aneurysm from circulation to reduce rupture risk. Acute ischemic stroke from a large vessel occlusion happens when a clot blocks a major brain artery, cutting off blood flow to a region of brain tissue.

Stent retriever vs Contact aspiration: Key Differences

A stent retriever captures clot in a self-expanding mesh that is withdrawn, while contact aspiration removes clot by applying suction at its face through a large-bore catheter. Published comparisons generally report broadly similar reperfusion overall, with differences that can depend on clot type and vessel anatomy. INVAMED offers both a stent retriever, the KinG device, and aspiration systems within its neurovascular line. The operator selects the first-line technique, and the two are often combined when needed.

How INVAMED Supports Both Approaches

INVAMED's neurovascular portfolio spans clot retrieval, aspiration, aneurysm packing, embolization, and the access tools that reach the intracranial circulation. Device sizes, coil diameter ranges, and catheter compatibilities are detailed in product documentation, and buyers should confirm local registration and indication status. INVAMED's neurovascular portfolio includes the KinG stent retriever, Spider detachable and pushable coils, the Libro liquid embolic agent, the Mantis directional and AngioHAND thrombectomy systems, flow diverter stents, and the InWIRE guidewire.

Key Considerations

  • Speed to reperfusion is a central factor in stroke thrombectomy, which shapes device readiness and workflow in eligible patients.
  • Manufacturer statements, including the described up-to-24-hour window for the KinG device, reflect product content and do not establish individual eligibility.
  • Clot characteristics and vessel tortuosity influence whether a stent retriever, aspiration, or combined technique is chosen.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the regulatory status of these neurovascular devices?

Device availability and regulatory status vary by country. Please contact INVAMED or your authorized local distributor for current regulatory information applicable to your region.

What are Spider coils made of?

According to INVAMED, Spider Intracranial Coils are made of a platinum-tungsten 92/8 percent alloy and are offered across 2 to 30 mm coil diameters in detachable and pushable configurations.

What treatment window does INVAMED cite for the KinG device?

According to INVAMED product content, the KinG device is described as capturing and extracting cerebral artery clots within a treatment window of up to 24 hours; eligibility is a clinical determination.

Clinical and Technical Context

According to INVAMED product content surfaced via its search index, the KinG device captures and extracts cerebral artery clots within a treatment window of up to 24 hours, though eligibility for any given patient is a clinical determination. Whether thrombectomy is indicated depends on occlusion location, time from onset, and imaging, as judged by the stroke team. Clot characteristics and vessel tortuosity influence whether a stent retriever, aspiration, or combined technique is chosen. All INVAMED neurovascular devices are intended for use by trained neurointerventional operators under imaging guidance and per the IFU.

Related on INVAMED

Important Disclaimer

This article is intended for general educational and technical information about medical device technologies. It is not medical advice, a diagnosis, or a treatment recommendation, and it does not replace consultation with a qualified healthcare professional. Any decision about diagnosis or treatment should be made by a licensed clinician based on an individual assessment. INVAMED devices are intended for use by trained healthcare professionals in accordance with the applicable Instructions for Use (IFU) and local regulatory approvals. Product availability and indications vary by country.

Reviewed by the INVAMED Medical Affairs team. Content is educational and technical in nature.

Reviewed by: INVAMED Medical Affairs

This content is prepared for educational purposes for healthcare professionals and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult clinical guidelines and product instructions for use.

Stent retriever vs Contact aspirationmechanical thrombectomy strokestent retrieverstroke clot retrieval proceduretime windowsuccess raterecanalization rate (TICI)