Comparing the efficacy and safety of the Skyflow device with those of the Solitaire FR stent in patients with acute ischemic stroke: a prospective, multicenter, randomized, non-inferiority clinical trial

BackgroundMechanical thrombectomy is the standard treatment for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) with large vessel occlusion (LVO) in the anterior circulation. This trial aimed to indicate whether Skyflow, a new thrombectomy device, could achieve the same safety and efficacy as Solitaire FR in the treatment of AIS.MethodsThis study was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, single blind, parallel, positive controlled, non-inferiority clinical trial. Patients with intracranial anterior circulation LVO within 8 hours from onset were included to receive thrombectomy treatment with either the Skyflow or Solitaire FR stent retriever. The primary endpoint was the rate of successful reperfusion (modified Treatment In Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) ≥2b) after the operation. The safety endpoints were the rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) at 24 hours after operation.ResultsA total of 95 and 97 patients were involved in the Skyflow group and Solitaire FR group, respectively. A successful reperfusion (mTICI ≥2b) was finally achieved in 84 (88.4%) patients in the Skyflow group and 80 (82.5%) patients in the Solitaire FR group. Skyflow was non-inferior to Solitaire FR in regard to the primary outcome, with the criterion of a non-inferiority margin of 12.5% (p=0.0002) after being adjusted for the combined center effect and the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score. The rate of periprocedural sICH and SAH did not differ significantly between the two groups.ConclusionEndovascular thrombectomy with the Skyflow stent retriever was non-inferior to Solitaire FR with regard to successful reperfusion in AIS due to LVO (with a pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 12.5%).

Efficacy and Safety of a Novel Thrombectomy Device in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose: The Tonbridge stent is a novel retriever with several design improvements which aim to achieve promising flow reperfusion in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We conducted a randomized controlled, multicenter, non-inferiority trial to compare the safety and efficacy of the Tonbridge stent with the Solitaire FR.Methods: AIS patients aged 18–85 years with large vessel occlusion in anterior circulation who could undergo puncture within 6 h of symptom onset were included. Randomization was performed on a 1:1 ratio to thrombectomy with either the Tonbridge stent or the Solitaire FR. The primary efficacy endpoint was successful reperfusion using a modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction score (mTICI) of 2b/3. Safety outcomes were symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) within 24 ± 6 h and all-cause mortality within 90 days. A clinically relevant non-inferiority margin of 12% was chosen as the acceptable difference between groups. Secondary endpoints included time from groin puncture to reperfusion, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score at 24 h and at 7 days, and a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0–2 at 90 days.Results: A total of 220 patients were enrolled; 104 patients underwent thrombectomy with the Tonbridge stent and 104 were treated with the Solitaire FR. In all test group patients, the Tonbridge was used as a single retriever without rescuing by other thrombectomy devices. Angioplasty with balloon and/or stent was performed in 26 patients in the Tonbridge group and 16 patients in the Solitaire group (p = 0.084). Before angioplasty, 86.5% of those in the Tonbridge group and 81.7% of those in the Solitaire group reached successful reperfusion (p = 0.343). Finally, more patients in the Tonbridge group achieved successful reperfusion (92.3 vs. 84.6%, 95% CI of difference value 0.9–16.7%, p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences on sICH within 24 ± 6 h between the two groups. All-cause mortality within 90 days was 13.5% in the Tonbridge group and 16.3% in the Solitaire group (p = 0.559). We noted no significant differences between groups on the NIHSS at either 24 h or 7 days and the mRS of 0–2 at 90 days.Conclusion: The trial indicated that the Tonbridge stent was non-inferior to the Solitaire FR within 6 h of symptom onset in cases of large vessel occlusion stroke.Clinical Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov, number: NCT03210623.

Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke With a New Device-Skyflow: Study Protocol for a Prospective, Multicenter, Stratified Randomized, Single-Blinded, Parallel, Positive Controlled, Non-inferiority Clinical Trial

Background: Stent retriever thrombectomy is the standard treatment for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) with large vessel occlusion (LVO) in anterior circulation. The aim of the trial is to evaluate whether the new thrombectomy device-Skyflow can achieve the same safety and efficacy as Solitaire FR in the treatment.Method: This study is a prospective, multicenter, stratified randomized, single blind, paralleled, positive controlled, non-inferiority clinical trial. The safety and efficacy of vascular recanalization in AIS patients who are treated with either a new thrombectomy device-Skyflow or with Solitaire FR and within 8 h of symptom onset will be compared. A total of 192 patients will be enrolled, each group with 96 patients. The primary endpoint is successful recanalization rate after the operation. The secondary efficacy endpoints are the time from artery puncture to successful recanalization (mTICI 2b-3), NIHSS scores of 24 h (18–36 h), and 7 ± 2 days after the operation, mRS scores, and the rate of patients with mRS 0–2 scores 90 ± 14 days after the operation, and the success rate of instrument operation. The safety endpoints are the rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and subarachnoid hemorrhage at 24 h (18–36 h) post-operation, incidence of adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE), all-cause mortality, and incidence of device defects.Discussion: This trial will provide information on the safety and efficacy of Sky-flow stent retriever in the treatment of AIS patients with anterior circulation LVO. The success of this trial will be the basis for the product to be finally officially listed and applied in China.Trial registration: Registered on 11 March 2018 with Chinese clinical trial registry. Registration number is ChiCTR1800015166.

Feasibility and safety of the strategy of first stenting without retrieval using Solitaire FR as a treatment for emergent large-vessel occlusion due to underlying intracranial atherosclerosis

OBJECTIVEThe optimal treatment for underlying intracranial atherosclerosis (ICAS) in patients with emergent large-vessel occlusion (ELVO) remains unclear. Reocclusion during endovascular treatment (EVT) occurs frequently (57.1%–77.3%) after initial recanalization with stent retriever (SR) thrombectomy in ICAS-related ELVO. This study aimed to compare treatment outcomes of the strategy of first stenting without retrieval (FRESH) using the Solitaire FR versus SR thrombectomy in patients with ICAS-related ELVO.METHODSThe authors retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke and intracranial ELVO of the anterior circulation who underwent EVT between January 2017 and December 2019 at Yeungnam University Medical Center. Large-vessel occlusion (LVO) of the anterior circulation was classified by etiology as follows: 1) no significant stenosis after recanalization (embolic group) and 2) remnant stenosis > 70% or lesser degree of stenosis with a tendency toward reocclusion and/or flow impairment during EVT (ICAS group). The ICAS group was divided into the SR thrombectomy group (SR thrombectomy) and the FRESH group.RESULTSA total of 105 patients (62 men and 43 women; median age 71 years, IQR 62.5–79 years) were included. The embolic, SR thrombectomy, and FRESH groups comprised 66 (62.9%), 26 (24.7%), and 13 (12.4%) patients, respectively. There were no significant differences between the SR thrombectomy and FRESH groups in symptom onset–to-door time, but puncture-to-recanalization time was significantly shorter in the latter group (39 vs 54 minutes, p = 0.032). There were fewer stent retrieval passes but more first-pass recanalizations in the FRESH group (p < 0.001). Favorable functional outcomes were significantly more frequent in the FRESH group (84.6% vs 42.3%, p = 0.017).CONCLUSIONSThis study’s findings suggest that FRESH, rather than rescue stenting, could be a treatment option for ICAS-related ELVO.

RECO Flow Restoration Device Versus Solitaire FR With the Intention for Thrombectomy Study (REDIRECT): a prospective randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVEThe RECO flow restoration (FR) device is a new stent retriever designed for rapid flow restoration in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) caused by large vessel occlusion (LVO). Here, the authors compared the efficacy and safety of the RECO device with the predicate Solitaire FR stent retriever.METHODSThe RECO Flow Restoration Device Versus Solitaire FR With the Intention for Thrombectomy Study (REDIRECT) was a multicenter, prospective, open randomized controlled trial. Patients with acute LVO at 7 Chinese stroke centers participated in the study. The primary efficacy endpoint was defined as a modified thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (mTICI) reperfusion grade ≥ 2 within three passes. The primary safety endpoint comprised any serious adverse device effect, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), and any serious adverse event (SAE; defined as cerebral palsy or death) within 24 hours after the procedure. The secondary efficacy endpoints consisted of functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score 0–2), procedure duration, and 90-day all-cause mortality.RESULTSBetween January 2014 and August 2016, 67 patients were randomly allocated to the RECO group and 69 patients to the Solitaire FR group. The primary efficacy endpoint (mTICI grade ≥ 2 within three passes) was similar in the two treatment groups (91% vs 87%, respectively, p = 0.5861), and the rate of reperfusion with an mTICI grade 2b/3 was 87% versus 75% (p = 0.1272). There were no serious adverse device effects in any patient. The rates of sICH (1.5% vs 7.2%, p = 0.1027) and SAEs (6.0% vs 1.4%, p = 0.2050) within 24 hours after the procedure were similar in the two treatment groups. There was no significant difference in the rate of functional independence (63% vs 46%, p = 0.0609) or 90-day all-cause mortality (13% vs 23%, p = 0.1848) or in procedure duration (85.39 ± 47.01 vs 89.94 ± 53.34 minutes, p = 0.5986) between the two groups.CONCLUSIONSThe RECO stent retriever is effective and safe as a mechanical thrombectomy device for AIS due to LVO.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT01983644 (clinicaltrials.gov)

Comparison of different types of endovascular mechanical embolectomy in acute ischemic stroke

SUMMARY Background: To compare the treatment efficacy of different types of endovascular mechanical embolectomy in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Material and Methods: A total of 89 patients with AIS were selected in our hospital from January 2014 to January 2016 and divided into tPA group (n=27), tPA+Trevo group (n=30) and tPA+Solitaire FR group (n=32) for different treatments. Treatment effectiveness was evaluated using NIHSS and mRS system. The NIHSS score, vascular recanalization rate and postoperative complications were compared among groups. Results: The NIHSS score of the tPA group was significantly lower than that of other two groups at 1 d after the operation (p < 0.05), but it was significantly higher than that of other two groups at 3 d and 3 w after the operation (p < 0.05). After the treatment, no significant difference in NIHSS score was found between the tPA+Trevo and tPA Solitaire FR groups. The revascularization rate was significantly higher, but the mortality rate in 90 d was significantly lower in the tPA+Trevo and tPA+Solitaire FR groups than that in the tPA group (p < 0.05), and no significant difference was found between the tPA+Trevo and tPA+Solitaire FR groups. The incidence rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was significantly lower in the tPA+Solitaire FR group than that in tPA+Trevo group (p < 0.05) or tPA group (p < 0.01). Significantly more patients with mRS no higher than 2 points were found in the tPA+Trevo and tPA+Solitaire FR groups than those in tPA group (p < 0.05), and no significant difference was found between the tPA+Trevo and tPA+Solitaire FR groups. Conclusion: TPA+Solitaire FR is a type of thrombectomy that is superior to tPA and tPA+Trevo in the treatment of patients with AIS.

Stent retrievers with segmented design improve the efficacy of thrombectomy in tortuous vessels

IntroductionTortuous vascular anatomy is one of the greatest challenges in mechanical thrombectomy. This study examines the impact of vascular tortuosity on the performance of stent retrievers and evaluates the efficacy of the newer generation stent retrievers with segmented design.Materials and methodsModels with mild, moderate, and severe tortuosity with an internal carotid artery (ICA) and a middle cerebral artery (MCA) were created. An elastic and cohesive clot was placed in the MCA lying from distal M1 and proximal M2. We assessed the revascularization rates of two commonly used stent retrievers (Trevo XP and Solitaire FR) and two newer stent retrievers with segmented design (Embotrap and Versi) in each vascular model.ResultsBoth the type of stent retriever and the severity of vessel tortuosity significantly affected the successful recanalization rate. Post-hoc tests showed that the rate of revascularization was significantly less in severe tortuosity than in mild or moderate tortuosity (P<0.001). The Versi resulted in higher success rates than the Solitaire (P<0.01) and the Trevo (P<0.05). The success rates of the Embotrap were higher than the Solitaire and Trevo stent retrievers, although the difference was not statistically significant.ConclusionsSevere tortuosity reduces the performance of mechanical thrombectomy. The segmented design in stent retrievers could improve the efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy in tortuous vessels.Trial registrationESCAPE NCT01778335;SWIFT PRIME >NCT01657461; REVASCAT >NCT01692379; All post-results.

North American Solitaire Stent Retriever Acute Stroke registry: post-marketing revascularization and clinical outcome results

BackgroundLimited post-marketing data exist on the use of the Solitaire FR device in clinical practice. The North American Solitaire Stent Retriever Acute Stroke (NASA) registry aimed to assess the real world performance of the Solitaire FR device in contrast with the results from the SWIFT (Solitaire with the Intention for Thrombectomy) and TREVO 2 (Trevo versus Merci retrievers for thrombectomy revascularization of large vessel occlusions in acute ischemic stroke) trials.MethodsThe investigator initiated NASA registry recruited North American sites to submit retrospective angiographic and clinical outcome data on consecutive acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients treated with the Solitaire FR between March 2012 and February 2013. The primary outcome was a Thrombolysis in Myocardial Ischemia (TIMI) score of ≥2 or a Treatment in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) score of ≥2a. Secondary outcomes were 90 day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score, mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage.Results354 patients underwent treatment for AIS using the Solitaire FR device in 24 centers. Mean time from onset to groin puncture was 363.4±239 min, mean fluoroscopy time was 32.9±25.7 min, and mean procedure time was 100.9±57.8 min. Recanalization outcome: TIMI ≥2 rate of 83.3% (315/354) and TICI ≥2a rate of 87.5% (310/354) compared with the operator reported TIMI ≥2 rate of 83% in SWIFT and TICI ≥2a rate of 85% in TREVO 2. Clinical outcome: 42% (132/315) of NASA patients demonstrated a 90 day mRS ≤2 compared with 37% (SWIFT) and 40% (TREVO 2). 90 day mortality was 30.2% (95/315) versus 17.2% (SWIFT) and 29% (TREVO 2).ConclusionsThe NASA registry demonstrated that the Solitaire FR device performance in clinical practice is comparable with the SWIFT and TREVO 2 trial results.