Article Text

Download PDFPDF
SNIS 9th annual meeting oral poster abstracts
P-007 Comparison of SOLITAIRE flow restoration device and the MERCI retriever among acute ischemic stroke patients with atrial fibrillation in the SWIFT multicenter, randomized trial
  1. J Saver1,
  2. R Jahan2,
  3. E Levy3,
  4. T Jovin4,
  5. B Baxter5,
  6. R Nogueira6,
  7. W Clark7,
  8. R Budzik8,
  9. O Zaidat9,
  10. for the SWIFT Trialists10
  1. 1Department of Neurology, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA
  2. 2Department of Radiology, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA
  3. 3Department of Neurosurgery, Millard Fillmore Hospital, Buffalo, New York, USA
  4. 4Department of Neurology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennysylania, USA
  5. 5Department of Neurology, Erlanger Hospital, Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
  6. 6Department of Neurology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
  7. 7Department of Neurology, Oregon Health Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
  8. 8Department of Neurology, Riverside Methodist Hospital, Columbus, Ohio, USA
  9. 9Department of Neurology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
  10. 10Various, Various, Various, California, USA


Background In the SWIFT randomized trial, neurothrombectomy with SOLITAIRE Flow Restoration device (SOLITAIRE) compared with the MERCI Retriever was superior in achieving the primary endpoint, successful recanalization without use of rescue therapy or symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SRNH), and was associated with improved outcomes on secondary clinical endpoints, including reduced mortality and higher rates of good neurological outcome at 3 months. Both treatment arms were generally well-matched on baseline characteristics, but an imbalance in the frequency of atrial fibrillation was noted. To minimize potential confounding by this imbalance, we undertook an analysis of trial primary and secondary outcomes confined to the subset of patients in SWIFT with atrial fibrillation.

Methods Multicenter RCT with blinded primary endpoint ascertainment. Key entry criteria: age 22–85; NIHSS 8–29; within 8 h of onset; ineligible or failed IV TPA; intracranial ICA, M1, M2, BA, or VA occlusion.

Results The total SWIFT study population, enrolled at 18 sites, comprised 144 patients, including 31 roll-in phase SOLITAIRE patients and 113 randomized patients, 58 SOLITAIRE, 55 MERCI. Among these patients, randomized patients, SOLITAIRE and MERCI treatment arms were comparable on 27 baseline demographic and medical history variables, including age, NIHSS, and onset to treatment time, but differed in history of atrial fibrillation (p=0.02). History of atrial fibrillation was present in 75/144 (52.1%) trial patients, including 12/31 (38.7%) roll-in SOLITAIRE patients, 26/58 (44.8%) randomized SOLITAIRE patients and 37/55 (67.3%) randomized MERCI patients. Outcome findings among the patients with atrial fibrillation are shown in the Abstract P-007 table 1.

Abstract P-007 Table 1

Conclusions Among patients with atrial fibrillation, the SOLITAIRE Flow Restoration device was superior to the MERCI Retriever in achieving successful recanalization free of symptomatic hemorrhagic transformation, reduced mortality, and more frequent good final neurologic outcomes.

Competing interests J Saver: Covidien. R Jahan: Covidien. E Levy: Covidien. T Jovin: Covidien. B Baxter: Covidien. R Nogueira: Covidien. W Clark: Covidien. R Budzik: Covidien. O Zaidat: Covidien. For the SWIFT Trialists: Covidien.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.