Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Lancet. 2012 Oct 6;380(9849):1241-9. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61384-1. Epub 2012 Aug 26.

Solitaire flow restoration device versus the Merci Retriever in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (SWIFT): a randomised, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial.

Author information

1
Department of Neurology and Stroke Center, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA. jsaver@ucla.edu

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The Solitaire Flow Restoration Device is a novel, self-expanding stent retriever designed to yield rapid flow restoration in acute cerebral ischaemia. We compared the efficacy and safety of Solitaire with the standard, predicate mechanical thrombectomy device, the Merci Retrieval System.

METHODS:

In this randomised, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial, we enrolled patients from 18 sites (17 in the USA and one in France). Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had acute ischaemic stroke with moderate to severe neurological deficits and were treatable by thrombectomy within 8 h of stroke symptom onset. We used a computer-generated randomisation sequence to randomly allocate patients to receive thrombectomy treatment with either Solitaire or Merci (1:1; block sizes of four and stratified by centre and stroke severity). The primary endpoint was Thrombolysis In Myocardial Ischemia (TIMI) scale 2 or 3 flow in all treatable vessels without symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, after up to three passes of the assigned device, as assessed by an independent core laboratory, which was masked to study assignment. Primary analysis was done by intention to treat. A prespecified efficacy stopping rule triggered an early halt to the trial. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT 01054560.

RESULTS:

Between February, 2010, and February, 2011, we randomly allocated 58 patients to the Solitaire group and 55 patients to the Merci group. The primary efficacy outcome was achieved more often in the Solitaire group than it was in the Merci group (61%vs 24%; difference 37% [95% CI 19-53], odds ratio [OR] 4·87 [95% CI 2·14-11·10]; p(non-inferiority)<0·0001, p(superiority)=0·0001). More patients had good 3-month neurological outcome with Solitaire than with Merci (58%vs 33%; difference 25% [6-43], OR 2·78 [1·25-6·22]; p(non-inferiority)=0·0001, p(superiority)=0·02). 90-day mortality was lower in the Solitaire group than it was in the Merci group (17 vs 38; difference -21% [-39 to -3], OR 0·34 [0·14-0·81]; p(non-inferiority)=0·0001, p(superiority)=0·02).

INTERPRETATION:

The Solitaire Flow Restoration Device achieved substantially better angiographic, safety, and clinical outcomes than did the Merci Retrieval System. The Solitaire device might be a future treatment of choice for endovascular recanalisation in acute ischaemic stroke.

FUNDING:

Covidien/ev3.

PMID:
22932715
DOI:
10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61384-1
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center