Background: There are little available data regarding the influence of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) on the efficacy of different first line endovascular treatment (EVT) techniques.
Methods: We used the dataset of the SWIFT-DIRECT trial which randomized 408 patients to IVT + EVT or EVT alone at 48 international sites. The protocol required the use of a stent retriever (SR), but concomitant use of a balloon guide catheter (BGC) and/or distal aspiration (DA) catheter was left to the discretion of the operators. Four first line techniques were applied in the study population: SR, SR + BGC, SR + DA, SR + DA + BGC. To assess whether the effect of allocation to IVT + EVT versus EVT alone was modified by the first line technique, interaction models were fitted for predefined outcomes. The primary outcome was first pass mTICI 2c‑3 reperfusion (FPR).
Results: This study included 385 patients of whom 172 were treated with SR + DA, 121 with SR + DA + BGC, 57 with SR + BGC and 35 with SR. There was no evidence that the effect of IVT + EVT versus EVT alone would be modified by the choice of first line technique; however, allocation to IVT + EVT increased the odds of FPR by a factor of 1.68 (95% confidence interval, CI 1.11-2.54).
Conclusion: This post hoc analysis does not suggest treatment effect heterogeneity of IVT + EVT vs EVT alone in different stent retriever techniques but provides evidence for increased FPR if bridging IVT is administered before stent retriever thrombectomy.
Keywords: Endovascular treatment; First line technique; Interventional; Neurointervention; Stroke.
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.