Dataset Information

Comparing Low- or Standard-Dose Alteplase in Endovascular Thrombectomy: Insights From a Nationwide Registry.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Timely intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular thrombectomy are the standard reperfusion treatments for large vessel occlusion stroke. Currently, it is unknown whether a low-dose thrombolytic agent (0.6 mg/kg alteplase) can offer similar efficacy to the standard dose (0.9 mg/kg alteplase).

Methods

We enrolled consecutive patients in the multicenter Taiwan Registry of Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke who had received combined thrombolysis (within 4.5 hours of onset) and thrombectomy treatment from January 2019 to April 2023. The choice of low- or standard-dose alteplase was based on the physician's discretion. The outcomes included successful reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score, 2b-3), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, 90-day modified Rankin Scale score, and 90-day mortality. The outcomes between the 2 groups were compared using multivariable logistic regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted analysis.

Results

Among the 2242 patients in the Taiwan Registry of Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke, 734 (33%) received intravenous alteplase. Patients in the low-dose group (n=360) were older, had more women, more atrial fibrillation, and longer onset-to-needle time compared with the standard-dose group (n=374). In comparison to low-dose alteplase, standard-dose alteplase was associated with a lower rate of successful reperfusion (81% versus 87%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.40-0.98]), a numerically higher incidence of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (6.7% versus 3.9%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.81 [95% CI, 0.88-3.69]), but better 90-day modified Rankin Scale score (functional independence [modified Rankin Scale score, 0-2], 47% versus 31%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.91 [95% CI, 1.28-2.86]), and a numerically lower mortality rate (9% versus 15%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.43-1.25]) after adjusting for covariates. Similar results were observed in the inverse probability of treatment weighting-adjusted models. The results were consistent across predefined subgroups and age strata.

Conclusions

Despite the lower rate of successful reperfusion and higher risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage with standard-dose alteplase, standard-dose alteplase was associated with a better functional outcome in patients receiving combined thrombolysis and thrombectomy.

SUBMITTER: Chen CH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10896194 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparing Low- or Standard-Dose Alteplase in Endovascular Thrombectomy: Insights From a Nationwide Registry.

Chen Chih-Hao CH Lee Chung-Wei CW Hsieh Yi-Chen YC Lin Chun-Jen CJ Chen Yu-Wei YW Lin Kuan-Hung KH Sung Pi-Shan PS Tang Chih-Wei CW Chu Hai-Jui HJ Tsai Kun-Chang KC Chou Chao-Liang CL Lin Ching-Huang CH Wei Cheng-Yu CY Yen Shang-Yih SY Chen Po-Lin PL Yeh Hsu-Ling HL Chan Lung L Sung Sheng-Feng SF Lee Meng M Liu Hon-Man HM Lin Yen-Heng YH Lee I-Hui IH Yeh Shin-Joe SJ Lien Li-Ming LM Chiou Hung-Yi HY Lee Jiunn-Tay JT Tang Sung-Chun SC Jeng Jiann-Shing JS

Stroke 20240205 3

<h4>Background</h4>Timely intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular thrombectomy are the standard reperfusion treatments for large vessel occlusion stroke. Currently, it is unknown whether a low-dose thrombolytic agent (0.6 mg/kg alteplase) can offer similar efficacy to the standard dose (0.9 mg/kg alteplase).<h4>Methods</h4>We enrolled consecutive patients in the multicenter Taiwan Registry of Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke who had received combined thrombolysis (within 4.5 ...[more]

PMID: 38314590

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine any differential efficacy and safety of low- vs standard-dose IV alteplase for lacunar vs nonlacunar acute ischemic stroke (AIS), we performed post hoc analyzes from the Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke Study (ENCHANTED) alteplase dose arm.MethodsIn a cohort of 3,297 ENCHANTED participants, we identified those with lacunar or nonlacunar AIS with different levels of confidence (definite/according to prespecified definitions based on clinical and adjudicated imaging findings. Logistic regression models were used to determine associations of lacunar AIS with 90-day outcomes (primary, modified Rankin Scale [mRS] scores 2-6; secondary, other mRS scores, intracerebral hemorrhage [ICH], and early neurologic deterioration or death) and treatment effects of low- vs standard-dose alteplase across lacunar and nonlacunar AIS with adjustment for baseline covariables.ResultsOf 2,588 participants with available imaging and clinical data, we classified cases as definite/probable lacunar (n = 490) or nonlacunar AIS (n = 2,098) for primary analyses. Regardless of alteplase dose received, lacunar AIS participants had favorable functional (mRS 2-6, adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.60 [0.47-0.77]) and other clinical or safety outcomes compared to participants with nonlacunar AIS. Low-dose alteplase (versus standard) had no differential effect on functional outcomes (mRS 2-6, 1.04 [0.87-1.24]) but reduced the risk of symptomatic ICH in all included participants. There were no differential treatment effects of low- vs standard-dose alteplase on all outcomes across lacunar and nonlacunar AIS (all p interaction ≥0.07).ConclusionsWe found no evidence from the ENCHANTED trial that low-dose alteplase had any advantages over standard dose for definite/probable lacunar AIS.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class II evidence that for patients with lacunar AIS, low-dose alteplase had no additional benefit or safety over standard-dose alteplase.Clinical trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01422616.

Project description:BackgroundRecent randomized trials have suggested that endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) alone may provide similar functional outcomes as the current standard of care, EVT combined with intravenous alteplase treatment, for acute ischemic stroke secondary to large vessel occlusion. We conducted an economic evaluation of these 2 therapeutic options.MethodsWe constructed a decision analytic model with a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients to assess the cost-effectiveness of EVT with intravenous alteplase treatment versus EVT alone for acute ischemic stroke secondary to large vessel occlusion from both the societal and public health care payer perspectives. We used studies and data published in 2009-2021 for model inputs, and acquired cost data for Canada and China, representing high- and middle-income countries, respectively. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) using a lifetime horizon and accounted for uncertainty using 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. All costs are reported in 2021 Canadian dollars.ResultsIn Canada, the difference in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained between EVT with alteplase and EVT alone was 0.10 from both the societal and health care payer perspectives. The difference in cost was $2847 from a societal perspective and $2767 from the payer perspective. In China, the difference in QALYs gained was 0.07 from both perspectives, and the difference in cost was $1550 from the societal perspective and $1607 from the payer perspective. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that the distributions of modified Rankin Scale scores at 90 days after stroke were the most influential factor on ICERs. For Canada, compared to EVT alone, the probability that EVT with alteplase would be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 per QALY gained was 58.7% from a societal perspective and 58.4% from a payer perspective. The corresponding values for at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $47 185 (3 times the Chinese gross domestic product per capita in 2021) were 65.2% and 67.4%.InterpretationFor patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion eligible for immediate treatment with both EVT alone and EVT with intravenous alteplase treatment, it is uncertain whether EVT with alteplase is cost-effective compared to EVT alone in Canada and China.

Project description:ImportanceThe effectiveness and safety of intravenous alteplase given before or concurrently with endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is uncertain. Randomized clinical trials suggest there is little difference in outcomes but with only modest precision and insufficient power to analyze uncommon outcomes including symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH).ObjectiveTo determine whether 8 prespecified outcomes are different in patients with acute ischemic stroke treated in routine clinical practice with EVT with alteplase compared with patients treated with EVT alone without alteplase. It was hypothesized that alteplase would be associated with higher risk of sICH.Design, setting, and participantsThis was an observational cohort study conducted from February 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020, that included adult patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with EVT within 6 hours of time last known well, after excluding patients without information on discharge destination and patients with in-hospital stroke. Participants were recruited from Get With The Guidelines-Stroke, a large nationwide registry of patients with acute ischemic stroke from 555 hospitals in the US.ExposuresIntravenous alteplase or no alteplase.Main outcomes and measuresPrespecified outcomes were discharge destination, independent ambulation at discharge, modified Rankin score at discharge, discharge mortality, cerebral reperfusion according to modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction grade, and sICH.ResultsThere were 15 832 patients treated with EVT (median [IQR] age, 72.0 [61.0-82.0] years; 7932 women [50.1%]); 10 548 (66.7%) received alteplase and 5284 (33.4%) did not. Patients treated with alteplase were younger, arrived via Emergency Medical Services sooner, were less likely to have certain comorbidities, including atrial fibrillation, hypertension, and diabetes, but had similar National Institutes of Health Stroke Severity (NIHSS) scores. Compared with patients who did not receive alteplase treatment, patients treated with alteplase were less likely to die (11.1% [1173 of 10 548 patients] vs 13.9% [734 of 5284 patients]; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.83; 95% CI, 0.77-0.89; P < .001), more likely to have no major disability based on modified Rankin scale of 2 or less at discharge (28.5% [2415 of 8490 patients] vs 20.7% [894 of 4322 patients]; aOR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.28-1.45; P < .001), and to have better reperfusion based on modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction grade 2b or greater (90.9% [8474 of 9318 patients] vs 88.0% [4140 of 4705 patients]; aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.28-1.50; P < .001). However, alteplase treatment was associated with higher risk of sICH (6.5% [685 of 10 530 patients] vs 5.3% [279 of 5249 patients]; OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.16-1.42; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this observational cohort study of patients treated with EVT, intravenous alteplase treatment was associated with better in-hospital survival and functional outcomes but higher sICH risk after adjusting for other covariates.

Project description:BackgroundStandard-dose intravenous alteplase for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in the unknown or extended time window beyond 4.5 h after symptom onset is both effective and safe for certain patients who were selected based on multimodal neuroimaging. However, uncertainty exists regarding the potential benefit of using low-dose alteplase among the Asian population outside the 4.5-h time window.MethodsConsecutive AIS patients who received intravenous alteplase between 4.5 and 9 h after symptom onset or with an unknown time of onset guided by multimodal computed tomography (CT) imaging were identified from our prospectively maintained database. The primary outcome was excellent functional recovery, defined as having a modified Rankin scale (mRS) score of 0-1 at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included functional independence (an mRS score of 0-2 at 90 days), early major neurologic improvement (ENI), early neurologic deterioration (END), any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH (sICH), and 90-day mortality. Propensity score matching (PSM) and multivariable logistic regression models were used to adjust for confounding factors and compare the clinical outcomes between the low- and standard-dose groups.ResultsFrom June 2019 to June 2022, a total of 206 patients were included in the final analysis, of which 143 were treated with low-dose alteplase and 63 were treated with standard-dose alteplase. After accounting for confounding factors, we observed that there were no statistically significant differences between the standard- and low-dose groups with respect to excellent functional recovery [adjusted odds ratio = 1.22 (aOR), 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.62-2.39; adjusted rate difference (aRD) = 4.6%, and 95% CI: -11.2 to 20.3%]. Patients of both groups had similar rates of functional independence, ENI, END, any ICH, sICH, and 90-day mortality. In the subgroup analysis, patients aged ≥70 years were more likely to achieve excellent functional recovery when receiving standard-dose rather than low-dose alteplase.ConclusionThe effectiveness of low-dose alteplase might be comparable to that of standard-dose alteplase in AIS patients aged <70 years with favorable perfusion-imaging profiles in the unknown or extended time window but not in those aged ≥70 years. Furthermore, low-dose alteplase did not significantly reduce the risk of sICH compared to standard-dose alteplase.

Project description:ImportanceA lower dose of intravenous alteplase appears to be a safer treatment option than the standard dose, reducing the risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage. There is uncertainty, however, over how this effect translates into an overall clinical benefit for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS).ObjectiveTo assess whether older, Asian, or severely affected patients with AIS who are considered at high risk of thrombolysis may benefit more from low-dose rather than standard-dose alteplase treatment.Design, setting, and participantsThis study is a prespecified secondary analysis of the Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke Study (ENCHANTED), an international, randomized, open-label, blinded, end-point clinical trial of low-dose vs standard-dose intravenous alteplase for patients with AIS. From March 1, 2012, to August 31, 2015, a total of 3310 patients who had a clinical diagnosis of AIS as confirmed by brain imaging and who fulfilled the local criteria for thrombolysis treatment were included in the alteplase-dose arms. Patients were randomly assigned to receive low-dose (0.6 mg/kg; 15% as bolus and 85% as infusion over 1 hour) or standard-dose (0.9 mg/kg; 10% as bolus and 90% as infusion over 1 hour) alteplase. Of the 3310 randomized patients, 13 patients were excluded for missing consent, mistaken randomization, and duplicate randomization numbers. This secondary analysis was conducted between May 1, 2016, and April 28, 2017.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was a poor outcome defined by the combination of death and any disability as scored by the modified Rankin Scale (scores range from 2 to 6, with the highest score indicating death) at 90 days.ResultsOf the 3297 patients included in the analysis, 1248 (37.9%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 67 (13) years. No significant differences in the treatment effects were observed between low- and standard-dose alteplase for poor outcomes (death or disability) by age, ethnicity, or severity (all P > .37 for interaction). Similarly, the treatment effects of low- vs standard-dose alteplase on function outcome (ordinal shift of the modified Rankin Scale) in Asians (odds ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.90-1.22) was consistent with non-Asians (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-1.14) (P = .32 for interaction). There were generally consistent reductions in rates of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage with low-dose alteplase, although this reduction was not statistically significant by age, ethnicity, or severity.Conclusions and relevanceThis analysis found that the effects of low-dose alteplase were not clearly superior to the effects of standard-dose alteplase on death or disability in key demographic subgroups of patients with AIS. Further investigation is required to identify patients with AIS who may benefit from low-dose alteplase.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01422616.

Project description:Background: To date, the role of bridging intravenous thrombolysis before mechanical thrombectomy (MTE) is controversial but still recommended in eligible patients. Different doses of intravenous alteplase have been used for treating patients with acute ischemic stroke from large-vessel occlusion (LVO-AIS) in Asia, largely due to variations in the risks for intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and treatment affordability. Uncertainty exists over the potential benefits of treating low-dose alteplase, as opposed to standard-dose alteplase, prior to MTE among patients with LVO-AIS. Aim: The aim of the study was to compare outcomes of low- vs. standard-dose of bridging intravenous alteplase before MTE among LVO-AIS patients. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of LVO-AIS patients who were treated with either 0.6 mg/kg or 0.9 mg/kg alteplase prior to MTE at a stroke center in Northern Vietnam. Multivariable logistic regression models, accounting for potential confounding factors including comorbidities and clinical factors (e.g., stroke severity), were used to compare the outcomes between the two groups. Our primary outcome was functional independence at 90 days following stroke (modified Rankin score; mRS ≤ 2). Secondary outcomes included any ICH incidence, early neurological improvement, recanalization rate, and 90-day mortality. Results: We analyzed data of 107 patients receiving bridging therapy, including 73 with low-dose and 34 with standard-dose alteplase before MTE. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in functional independence at 90 days (adjusted OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.29-3.52) after accounting for potential confounding factors. Compared to the standard-dose group, patients with low-dose alteplase before MTE had similar rates of successful recanalization, early neurological improvement, 90-day mortality, and ICH complications. Conclusion: In the present study, patients with low-dose alteplase before MTE were found to achieve comparable clinical outcomes compared to those receiving standard-dose alteplase bridging with MTE. The findings suggest potential benefits of low-dose alteplase in bridging therapy for Asian populations, but this needs to be confirmed by further clinical trials.

Dataset Information

Comparing Low- or Standard-Dose Alteplase in Endovascular Thrombectomy: Insights From a Nationwide Registry.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Comparing Low- or Standard-Dose Alteplase in Endovascular Thrombectomy: Insights From a Nationwide Registry.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets