...
首页> 外文期刊>The Lancet >Solitaire flow restoration device versus the Merci Retriever in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (SWIFT): A randomised, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial
【24h】

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

机译:急性缺血性卒中(SWIFT)患者中的单人纸牌流恢复设备与Merci猎犬:一项随机,平行组,非劣效性试验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

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 stratifi ed by centre and stroke severity). The primary endpoint was Thrombolysis In Myocardial Ischemia (TIMI) scale 2 or 3 fl ow 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-inferiority0·0001, 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; diff erence -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.
机译:背景纸牌流程恢复装置是一种新颖的自扩张式支架取回器,设计用于在急性脑缺血中实现快速的流程恢复。我们将纸牌与标准的谓词机械血栓切除术设备Merci Retrieval System进行了比较。方法在这项随机,平行组,非劣效性试验中,我们招募了18个地点的患者(美国为17个,法国为1个)。如果患者患有中度至重度神经功能缺损的急性缺血性中风,并且在中风症状发作后8小时内可通过血栓切除术治疗,则符合入选条件。我们使用计算机生成的随机序列将患者随机分配接受单人接龙或Merci血栓切除术治疗(1:1;块大小为4,并根据中心和中风的严重程度进行分层)。主要终点是在无症状性颅内出血的所有可治疗血管中,在2次或3次无症状性颅内出血的可治疗血管中进行溶栓治疗,经独立的核心实验室评估,经过指定的器械最多通过3次后,该掩盖了研究任务。初步分析是按意向进行的。预先规定的疗效停止规则触发了该试验的早期停止。该研究已在ClinicalTrials.gov上注册,编号NCT01054560。结果在2010年2月至2011年2月之间,我们随机将58位患者分配给了纸牌组,将55位患者分配给了Merci组。纸牌组比Merci组更能达到主要疗效结果(61%vs 24%;相差37%[95%CI 19-53],优势比[OR] 4·87 [95%CI 2·14-11·10]; p非劣效性<0·0001,p优劣= 0·0001)。纸牌的3个月神经功能良好的患者多于Merci(58%比33%;差异25%[6-43],OR 2·78 [1·25-6·22]; p非自卑= 0 ·0001,p优越性= 0·02)。纸牌组的90天死亡率低于Merci组(17 vs 38;差异-21%[-39至-3],OR 0·34 [0·14-0·81]; p非劣等= 0·0001,p优势= 0·02)。解释与Merci检索系统相比,Solitaire Flow Restoration装置在血管造影,安全性和临床效果方面均取得了明显改善。 Solitaire设备可能是急性缺血性卒中血管内再通的未来治疗选择。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号