Efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment versus intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background and purpose
Although endovascular therapy (ET) is increasingly used in patients with moderate to severe acute ischemic stroke, its efficacy and safety remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis aiming to compare the benefits and safety of endovascular treatment and intravenous thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke.Methods
We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Science direct and Springer unitil July, 2013. The primary outcomes included good outcome (mRS ≤ 2) and excellent outcome (mRS ≤ 1) at 90 days or at trial end point. Secondary outcomes were occurrence of symptomatic hemorrhage and all-cause mortality.Results
Using a prespecified search strategy, 5 RCTs with 1106 patients comparing ET and intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) were included in the meta-analysis. ET and IVT were associated with similar good (43.06% vs 41.78%; OR=1.14; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.69; P=0.52;) and excellent (30.43% vs 30.42%; OR=1.05; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.38; P=0.72;) outcome. For additional end points, ET was not associated with increased occurrence of symptomatic hemorrhage (6.25% vs. 6.22%; OR=1.03; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.69; P=0.91;), or all-cause mortality (18.45% vs. 17.35%; OR=1.00; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.39; P=0.99;).Conclusions
Formal meta-analysis indicates that there are similar safety outcomes and functional independence with endovascular therapy and intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke.
SUBMITTER: Lin C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3814965 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceIntravenous thrombolysis (IVT) followed by mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is recommended to treat acute ischemic stroke (AIS) with a large vessel occlusion (LVO). Most hospitals do not have on-site MT facilities, and most patients need to be transferred secondarily after IVT (drip and ship), which may have an effect on the neurologic outcome.ObjectiveTo compare the functional independence at 3 months between patients treated under the drip-and-ship paradigm and those treated on site (mothership).Design, setting, and participantsThis study used a prospectively gathered registry of patients with AIS to select patients admitted through the Saint-Antoine and Tenon (drip and ship) or the Fondation Rothschild (mothership) hospitals from January 1, 2013, through April 30, 2016. The study included patients older than 18 years treated with bridging therapy for AIS with LVO of the anterior circulation. Among the 159 patients who received MT at the mothership, 100 had been transferred after IVT from the drip-and-ship hospitals and 59 had received IVT on site.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was 3-month functional independence (modified Rankin scale score ≤2). Both groups were compared using a multivariate linear model, including variables that were significantly different in the 2 groups.ResultsDuring the study period, 497 patients were hospitalized at the drip-and-ship and mothership hospitals for an AIS eligible to reperfusion therapy; 11 patients had a basilar artery occlusion and were excluded, leaving 100 patients in the drip-and-ship group (mean age, 73 years; age range, 60-81 years; 57 men [57.0%]) and 59 in the mothership group (mean age, 70 years; age range, 58-82 years; 29 men [49.2%]). The proportion of patients with a favorable neurologic outcome at 3 months was similar in both groups (drip and ship, 61 [61.0%]; mothership, 30 [50.8%]; P = .26), even after adjusting the analysis for the baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, diffusion-weighted imaging Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score, and general anesthesia (P = .82). Patients had less severe conditions in the drip-and-ship group (median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, 15 vs 17 [P = .03]; median diffusion-weighted imaging Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score, 7.5 vs 7 [P = .05]). Process times were longer in the drip-and-ship group (onset-to-needle time, 150 vs 135 minutes; onset-to-puncture time, 248 vs 189 minutes; and onset-to-recanalization time, 297 vs 240 minutes; P < .001). Both groups were similar in terms of substantial recanalization (Thrombolysis in Cerebral Ischemia scores 2B to 3; drip and ship, 84 [84.0%]; mothership, 47 [79.7%]; P = .49) and symptomatic hemorrhagic transformation (drip and ship, 2 [2.0%]; mothership, 2 [3.4%]; P = .63).Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that patients treated under the drip-and-ship paradigm also benefit from bridging therapy, with no statistically significant difference compared with those treated directly in a comprehensive stroke center.
| S-EPMC5822198 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIn patients with stroke attributable to cervical artery dissection, we compared endovascular therapy to intravenous thrombolysis regarding three-month outcome, recanalisation and complications.Materials and methodsIn a multicentre intravenous thrombolysis/endovascular therapy-register-based cohort study, all consecutive cervical artery dissection patients with intracranial artery occlusion treated within 6?h were eligible for analysis. Endovascular therapy patients (with or without prior intravenous thrombolysis) were compared to intravenous thrombolysis patients regarding (i) excellent three-month outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0-1), (ii) symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, (iii) recanalisation of the occluded intracranial artery and (iv) death. Upon a systematic literature review, we performed a meta-analysis comparing endovascular therapy to intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection patients regarding three-month outcome using a random-effects Mantel-Haenszel model.ResultsAmong 62 cervical artery dissection patients (median age 48.8 years), 24 received intravenous thrombolysis and 38 received endovascular therapy. Excellent three-month outcome occurred in 23.7% endovascular therapy and 20.8% with intravenous thrombolysis patients. Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage occurred solely among endovascular therapy patients (5/38 patients, 13.2%) while four (80%) of these patients had bridging therapy; 6/38 endovascular therapy and 0/24 intravenous thrombolysis patients died. Four of these 6 endovascular therapy patients had bridging therapy. Recanalisation was achieved in 84.2% endovascular therapy patients and 66.7% intravenous thrombolysis patients (odds ratio 3.2, 95% confidence interval [0.9-11.38]). Sensitivity analyses in a subgroup treated within 4.5?h revealed a higher recanalisation rate among endovascular therapy patients (odds ratio 3.87, 95% confidence interval [1.00-14.95]), but no change in the key clinical findings. In a meta-analysis across eight studies (n?=?212 patients), cervical artery dissection patients (110 intravenous thrombolysis and 102 endovascular therapy) showed identical odds for favourable outcome (odds ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval [0.38-2.44]) among endovascular therapy patients and intravenous thrombolysis patients.Discussion and conclusionIn this cohort study, there was no clear signal of superiority of endovascular therapy over intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection patients, which - given the limitation of our sample size - does not prove that endovascular therapy in these patients cannot be superior in future studies. The observation that symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage and deaths in the endovascular therapy group occurred predominantly in bridging patients requires further investigation.
| S-EPMC6453244 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeTimely intravenous (IV) thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke is associated with better clinical outcomes. Acute stroke care implemented with "Stroke Code" (SC) may increase IV tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) administration. The present study aimed to investigate the impact of SC on thrombolysis.MethodsThe study period was divided into the "pre-SC era" (January 2006 to July 2010) and "SC era" (August 2010 to July 2013). Demographics, critical times (stroke symptom onset, presentation to the emergency department, neuroimaging, thrombolysis), stroke severity, and clinical outcomes were recorded and compared between the two eras.ResultsDuring the study period, 5957 patients with acute ischemic stroke were admitted; of these, 1301 (21.8%) arrived at the emergency department within 3 h of stroke onset and 307 (5.2%) received IV-tPA. The number and frequency of IV-tPA treatments for patients with an onset-to-door time of <3 h increased from the pre-SC era (n?=?91, 13.9%) to the SC era (n?=?216, 33.3%) (P<0.001). SC also improved the efficiency of IV-tPA administration; the median door-to-needle time decreased (88 to 51 min, P<0.001) and the percentage of door-to-needle times ?60 min increased (14.3% to 71.3%, P<0.001). The SC era group tended to have more patients with good outcome (modified Rankin Scale ?2) at discharge (49.5 vs. 39.6%, P?=?0.11), with no difference in symptomatic hemorrhage events or in-hospital mortality.ConclusionThe SC protocol increases the percentage of acute ischemic stroke patients receiving IV-tPA and decreases door-to-needle time.
| S-EPMC4128738 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) combined with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS).MethodsPatients with AIS who underwent IVT were enrolled and 1:1 randomized to the RIC group and sham-RIC group in this study. RIC (or sham-RIC) was performed twice within 6-24 h of IVT. The subjects in the two groups were followed up for 90 days. The safety outcome included the ratio of hemorrhagic transformation (HT), adverse events during the follow-up, blood pressure within the first 24 h after IVT, and laboratory tests 24 h after IVT. The efficacy outcome included the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score, National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score during the follow-up, and level of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) tested 24 h after IVT.ResultsForty-nine patients (24 in the RIC group and 25 in the sham-RIC group) were recruited. No significant difference was observed in the ratio of HT, adverse events, blood pressure, coagulation function or liver function between groups. In addition, there was no significant difference in mRS score and NIHSS score during the follow-up between groups. However, patients in the RIC group exhibited a significant lower level of hs-CRP compared with the control group (P = 0.048).InterpretationRIC combined with IVT is safe in the treatment of AIS. The neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory effects of this therapy warrant further study on a larger scale.
| S-EPMC7318096 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The efficacy and safety of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in cancer patients remained uncertain due to low level evidence in the latest guideline for AIS. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of IVT in cancer patients with stronger evidence. We searched Medline, Embase, CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov until April 2020 for studies reporting outcomes of functional independence, hemorrhagic transformation (HT), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH), major bleeding (MB), in-hospital mortality or 3-month mortality after IVT for AIS in cancer patients. For each outcome, the odds ratio between cancer and non-cancer patients, the risk difference between gastrointestinal and other malignancy, and the proportion in cancer patients were calculated. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference between cancer and non-cancer patients in favorable outcome, HT, SICH, MB, in-hospital mortality and 3-month mortality. Furthermore, there's no significant difference between patients with gastrointestinal and other malignancy in favorable outcome, HT, SICH, MB and 3-month mortality. In race-based subgroup analysis, Asians implied greater likelihood of HT and SICH than non-Asians. Therefore, the study confirmed and strengthened the validity of the guideline with stronger evidence that cancer shouldn't be an exclusion criterion of IVT. Inconsistent with the guideline, gastrointestinal malignancy may not remain an absolute contraindication of IVT while Asians implied increased HT and SICH, which needed further exploration.
| S-EPMC7476124 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesWe aimed to investigate effects of deep white matter hyperintensity (DWMH) and periventricular hyperintensity (PVH) on the efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS).MethodsA total of 113 AIS patients with WMH were categorized into the PVH group and the DWMH group according to the lesion location, with the division of two subgroups based on whether or not they received IVT treatment: the thrombolysis group and the control group. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used for proportional hazards of recurrent stroke. Further, multivariate Cox regression analysis was employed.ResultsOf total patients, there were 62 PVH patients and 51 DWMH patients: 27 of PVH patients and 22 of DWMH patients received IVT, and the remaining patients only received routine treatment. DWMH patients had a higher risk of END (36.4% vs. 11.1%; p = 0.034) and HT (22.7% vs. 3.7%; p = 0.038) than PVH patients in the thrombolysis group. Moreover, DWMH patients undergoing IVT also had a higher risk of END (36.4% vs. 10.3%; x2 = 5.050; p = 0.025) and HT (22.7% vs. 3.4%; x2 = 4.664; p = 0.031) than DWMH patients without IVT. Again, PVH patients had a higher rate of recurrent stroke (20.0% vs. 3.4%; p = 0.034) than DWMH patients in the control group after 90-day follow-up. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a significant difference in cumulative probability of no major endpoint events (p = 0.039). Further, multivariate Cox regression revealed that PVH is an independent risk factor for stroke recurrence in AIS patients after adjusting confounding factors.ConclusionsThe location of WMH is closely associated with the efficacy of IVT in AIS patients.
| S-EPMC6305931 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis study examined the neurologists' perspective toward intravenous thrombolysis for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke and the influencing factors in a Chinese Province.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted from 1 October 2014 to 31 January 2015. A total of 719 neurologists from 66 hospitals in Hubei Province were included. A questionnaire was designed, and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify the factors associated with the neurologists' perspective toward intravenous thrombolysis.ResultsAmong the responding neurologists, 67.3% reported using intravenous thrombolysis and 32.9% believed the treatment was unsafe. Approximately 51.4% reported deficits in their knowledge of intravenous thrombolysis and 45.8% felt unconfident about their ability to employ the treatment. The majority (90.1%) supported hospitals in performing intravenous thrombolysis for eligible patients. Their safety concern was associated with hospital grade (odds ratio[OR] = 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-3.7) and previous experiences with thrombolysis (OR = 3.1; 95% CI, 2.1-4.6). Their confidence was associated with their educational background (OR = 2.5; 95% CI, 1.3-4.5), knowledge mastery (OR = 10.4; 95% CI, 6.6-16.3), and previous experiences with thrombolysis (OR = 3.3; 95% CI, 2.1-5.3). Their attitudes were associated with gender (OR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.3-1.0) and previous experiences with thrombolysis (OR = 4.9; 95% CI, 2.5-9.4).ConclusionsMost neurologists in Hubei Province, China, identified with intravenous thrombolysis for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. However, they were weak in knowledge and lack confidence. Therefore, training, especially practical training, is needed to promote the use of thrombolysis in the region.
| S-EPMC5853636 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Since the introduction of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) into clinical practice in the mid 1990s, no adjunctive treatment has further improved clinical outcomes in patients with ischemic stroke. The safety, feasibility, and efficacy of combining intravenous (IV) rtPA with endovascular interventions has been described; however, no direct comparative study has yet established whether endovascular interventions after IV rtPA are superior to IV rtPA alone. A retrospective case-control study was designed to address this issue.Between 2003 and 2006, 33 consecutive patients with acute ischemic stroke and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores >/=10 were treated with IV rtPA in combination with endovascular interventions (IV plus intervention) at a tertiary care facility. Outcomes were compared with a control cohort of 30 consecutive patients treated with IV rtPA (IV only) at a comparable facility where endovascular interventions were not available.Baseline parameters were similar between the 2 groups. We found that the IV-plus-intervention group experienced significantly lower mortality at 90 days (12.1% versus 40.0%, P = .019) with a significantly greater improvement in NIHSS scores by the time of discharge or follow-up (P = .025). In the IV-plus-intervention group, patients with admission NIHSS scores between 10 and 15 and patients </=80 years of age showed the greatest improvement, with a significant change of the NIHSS scores from admission (P = .00015 and P = .013, respectively).In this small case-control study of patients with acute ischemic stroke and admission NIHSS scores >/=10, there was a suggestion of incremental clinical benefit among patients receiving endovascular interventions following standard administration of IV rtPA.
| S-EPMC5628737 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:endovascular therapy (ET) is the standard of care for anterior circulation acute ischemic stroke (AIS) caused by large vessel occlusion (LVO). The role of adjunctive intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in these patients remains unclear. The present study aims to investigate whether IVT followed by ET (CoT, combined therapy) provides additional benefits over direct ET for anterior circulation AIS with LVO. METHODS:we achieved a single center retrospective study of patients with AIS caused by anterior circulation LVO, referred to our center between January 2014 and January 2017 and treated with ET. Functional recovery (modified Rankin at 3-months follow-up), recanalization rate (thrombolysis in cerebral infarction [TICI] score) and time, early follow-up brain CT scan infarct volume (EFIV) (for recanalized patients only), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) and 3-month mortality were the outcomes of interests. Independent predictors of the outcomes were explored with multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS:145 subjects were included in the study, of whom 70 underwent direct ET and 75 were treated with CoT. Functional independence at 3-months was more frequent in CoT subjects compared to patients who received direct ET (mRS score 0-1: 48.5% vs 18.6%; P?<?0.001. mRS score 0-2: 67.1% vs 37.3%; P?<?0.001); CoT patients had also higher first-pass success rate (62.7% vs 38.6%, P?<?0.05), higher recanalization rate (84.3% vs 65.3%; P?=?0.009) and, in recanalized subjects, smaller EFIV (16.4?ml vs 62.3?ml; P?=?0.003). Mortality and intracranial bleeding did not differ between the two groups. In multivariable regression analysis, low baseline NIHSS score (P?<?0.05), vessel recanalization (P?=?0.05) and CoT (P?=?0.03) were independent predictors of favorable outcome at three months. CONCLUSIONS:CoT appears more effective than ET alone for anterior circulation AIS with LVO, with similar safety profile.
| S-EPMC6540520 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Approximately 20% of the US population primarily speaks a language other than English at home. Yet the effect of language preference on treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients remains unknown. We aimed to evaluate the influence of language preference on AIS patients' receipt of intravenous (IV) thrombolysis.We analyzed data from 3894 AIS patients who participated in the American Heart Association "Get With The Guidelines®-Stroke" program at our hospital from January 1, 2003 to April 30, 2014. Information included patients' language in which they preferred to receive medical care. We used descriptive statistics and stepwise logistic regression models to examine associations between patients' language preference and receipt of IV thrombolysis, adjusting for relevant covariates. A total of 306/3295 (9.3%) AIS patients preferred to speak a non-English language and represented 25 different languages. Multivariable analyses adjusting for other socioeconomic factors showed that non-English-preferring patients were more likely than English-preferring patients to receive IV thrombolysis (OR=1.64; CI=1.09-2.48; P=0.02). However, in models that also included age, sex, and initial NIH Stroke Scale, patients' language preference was no longer significant (OR 1.38; CI=0.88-2.15; P=0.16), but NIH Stroke Scale was strongly associated with receiving IV thrombolysis (OR=1.15 per point; CI=1.13-1.16; P<0.0001).Contrary to our hypothesis, non-English-preferring was not associated with lower rates of IV thrombolysis among AIS patients once initial stroke severity was accounted for.
| S-EPMC5210419 | biostudies-literature