An efficacy and safety comparison between different stentriever designs in acute ischaemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

• We conducted a meta-analysis of stentrievers in acute ischaemic stroke.
• We assessed recanalization rates and functional outcomes of stentrievers.
• We also explored any differences between different stentriever designs.
• We failed to demonstrate significant differences between Trevo and Solitaire.

AimTo assess the recanalisation rates and long-term functional outcomes of the Solitaire and Trevo devices; to compare these results to those from the Solitaire With the Intention For Thrombectomy (SWIFT) trial and TREVO 2 studies; and to assess for statistical differences in the outcomes between the two devices.Materials and methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that utilised stentrievers in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke was conducted. The results were compared to those of the SWIFT and TREVO 2 trials and outcome differences between Trevo (Stryker, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA) and Solitaire (ev3/Covidien, Irvine, California, USA) were analysed statistically.ResultsSolitaire had a lower mortality rate compared to Trevo (16.2% [95% confidence interval {CI}: 13.1%, 19.8%] versus 22.2% [95% CI: 10.8%, 40.2%]) and achieved a higher rate of functional independence (52.1% [95% CI: 46.3%, 57.8%] versus 47.6% [95% CI: 36.7%, 58.8%]). Statistical tests, however, failed to demonstrate significant differences in either functional outcomes or 3-month mortality rates. No significant differences were noted in weighted mean recanalisation rates between the Solitaire and Trevo groups.ConclusionStentrievers achieve a high rate of recanalisation and functional independence in acute ischaemic stroke and have a relatively good safety profile. No significant differences in functional outcomes, mortality, and symptomatic intra-cranial haemorrhage could be demonstrated between two popular stentrievers designs, namely Trevo and Solitaire.