Dataset Information

Endovascular Treatment With and Without Intravenous Thrombolysis in Large Vessel Occlusions Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Background: Previous studies have shown conflicting results about the benefits of pretreatment with intravenous thrombolysis before endovascular treatment (EVT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) with large vessel occlusions (LVOs). This study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of EVT alone vs. bridging therapy (BT) in patients with AIS with LVOs. Methods: A systematic review with meta-analysis of all available studies comparing clinical outcomes between BT and EVT alone was conducted by searching the National Center for Biotechnology Information/National Library of Medicine PubMed and Web of Science databases for relevant literature from database inception to October 20, 2020. Results: A total of 93 studies enrolling 45,190 patients were included in the present analysis. In both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, BT was associated with a higher likelihood of 90-day good outcome (crude odds ratio [cOR] 1.361, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.234-1.502 and adjusted OR [aOR] 1.369, 95% CI 1.217-1.540) and successful reperfusion (cOR 1.271, 95% CI 1.149-1.406 and aOR 1.267, 95% CI 1.095-1.465) and lower odds of 90-day mortality (cOR 0.619, 95% CI 0.560-0.684 and aOR 0.718, 95% CI 0.594-0.868) than EVT alone. The two groups did not differ in the occurrence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) (cOR 1.062, 95% CI 0.915-1.232 and aOR 1.20, 95% CI 0.95-1.47), 24-h early recovery (cOR 1.306, 95% CI 0.906-1.881 and aOR 1.46, 95% CI 0.46-2.19), and number of thrombectomy device passes ≤ 2 (aOR 1.466, 95% CI 0.983-2.185) after sensitivity analyses and adjustment for publication bias. Conclusions: BT provides more benefits than EVT alone in terms of clinical functional outcomes without compromising safety in AIS patients with LVOs.

SUBMITTER: Li S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8437100 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and purposeAlthough current guidelines advocate pretreatment with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in all eligible patients with acute ischemic stroke with large-vessel occlusion before mechanical thrombectomy, there are observational data questioning the efficacy of this approach. One of the main arguments in favor of IVT pretreatment is the potential for tissue-type plasminogen activator-induced successful reperfusion (SR) before the onset of endovascular procedure.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials and observational cohorts providing rates of SR with IVT in patients with large-vessel occlusion before the initiation of mechanical thrombectomy. We also performed subgroup analyses according to study type (randomized controlled clinical trials versus observational) and according to the inclusion per protocol of patients with tandem (intracranial/extracranial) occlusions.ResultsWe identified 13 eligible studies (7 randomized controlled clinical trials and 6 observational cohorts), including 1561 patients with acute ischemic stroke (median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, 17) with large-vessel occlusion. SR following IVT and before mechanical thrombectomy was documented in 11% (95% confidence interval, 7%-16%), with no difference among cohorts derived from randomized controlled clinical trials and observational studies. There was significant heterogeneity across included studies both in the overall analysis and among subgroups (I2>84%; P for Cochran Q, <0.001). Higher tissue-type plasminogen activator-induced SR rates were documented in studies reporting the exclusion of tandem occlusions (17%; 95% confidence interval, 11%-23%) compared with the rest (7%; 95% confidence interval, 4%-11%; P for subgroup differences, 0.003).ConclusionsPretreatment with systemic thrombolysis in patients with large-vessel occlusion eligible for mechanical thrombectomy results in SR in 1 of 10 cases, negating the need for additional endovascular reperfusion. Tandem occlusions seem to be the least responsive to IVT pretreatment.

Project description:BackgroundRecent studies have implied that ongoing intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) during endovascular treatment (ET) improves functional outcomes in patients who have undergone stroke caused by a large vessel occlusion (LVO). In this study, we investigated the effect of ongoing IVT until completion of ET on procedure duration, first-pass thrombectomy rate, and periprocedural complications.MethodsWe analyzed patients from the German Stroke Registry-Endovascular Treatment dataset, collected between June 2015 and December 2021. Primary outcomes were modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score after 3 months and achievement of a Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction (TICI) score of 2b-3. Secondary parameters included ET duration, first-pass thrombectomy, and periprocedural complications.ResultsOf the 13,082 patients in the dataset, 1,639 met the study inclusion criteria. A total of n = 317 patients (19.3%) underwent ongoing IVT until completion of ET, while IVT was completed prior to ET in 1,322 patients (80.7%). Ongoing IVT was associated with higher rates of achievement of an mRS score of 0-2 (or a back-to-baseline) after 3 months [odds ratio (OR) 1.53; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-2.17]. Furthermore, ongoing IVT was predictive of achievement of a TICI score of 2b-3 (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.03-1.83) and of first-pass thrombectomy (OR 2.07; 95% CI 1.51-2.84), while reducing the rate of peri-interventional complications (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.44-0.94) and reducing ET duration by 24 min [β = -24.35; 95% CI -32.92-(-15.79)].ConclusionOur findings suggest that ongoing IVT until ET completion has a favorable impact on both clinical and angiographic outcomes, as well as on periprocedural conditions, regardless of the overall time intervals involved. Therefore, rapid ET after IVT should be sought in order to take advantage of the additive effect of ongoing IVT during ET. Future studies should consider IVT timing in the context of ET as a potential confounder and treatment target.

Project description:Background: Whether bridging treatment combining intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is superior to direct EVT alone for emergent large vessel occlusion (LVO) in the anterior circulation is unknown. A systematic review and a meta-analysis were performed to investigate and assess the effect and safety of bridging treatment vs. direct EVT in patients with LVO in the anterior circulation. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library were searched to assess the effect and safety of bridging treatment and direct EVT in LVO. Functional independence, mortality, asymptomatic and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (aICH and sICH, respectively), and successful recanalization were evaluated. The risk ratio and the 95% CI were analyzed. Results: Among the eight studies included, there was no significant difference in the long-term functional independence (OR = 1.008, 95% CI = 0.845-1.204, P = 0.926), mortality (OR = 1.060, 95% CI = 0.840-1.336, P = 0.624), recanalization rate (OR = 1.015, 95% CI = 0.793-1.300, P = 0.905), and the incidence of sICH (OR = 1.320, 95% CI = 0.931-1.870, P = 0.119) between bridging therapy and direct EVT. After adjusting for confounding factors, bridging therapy showed a lower recanalization rate (effect size or ES = -0.377, 95% CI = -0.684 to -0.070, P = 0.016), but there was no significant difference in the long-term functional independence (ES = 0.057, 95% CI = -0.177 to 0.291, P = 0.634), mortality (ES = 0.693, 95% CI = -0.133 to 1.519, P = 0.100), and incidence of sICH (ES = -0.051, 95% CI = -0.687 to 0.585, P = 0.875) compared with direct EVT. Meanwhile, in the subgroup analysis of RCT, no significant difference was found in the long-term functional independence (OR = 0.927, 95% CI = 0.727-1.182, P = 0.539), recanalization rate (OR = 1.331, 95% CI = 0.948-1.867, P = 0.099), mortality (OR = 1.072, 95% CI = 0.776-1.481, P = 0.673), and sICH incidence (OR = 1.383, 95% CI = 0.806-2.374, P = 0.977) between patients receiving bridging therapy and those receiving direct DVT. Conclusion: For stroke patients with acute anterior circulation occlusion and who are eligible for intravenous thrombolysis, there is no significant difference in the clinical effect between direct EVT and bridging therapy, which needs to be verified by more randomized controlled trials.

Project description:BackgroundThe current guideline recommended the use of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) before Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT), but the effectiveness and safety of tenecteplase compare to alteplase in patients before EVT remain uncertain.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library to identify eligible articles from inception until September 16, 2023. The primary outcome was functional independence (mRS 0-2) at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included excellent outcome (mRS 0-1) at 90 days, all-cause mortality at follow-up, successful reperfusion (TICI 2b-3) after the end of EVT, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) or any intracranial hemorrhage (aICH). The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42023470419.ResultsEight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included involving 2,836 acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients. Compared to EVT alone, tenecteplase (0.25 mg/kg and 0.4 mg/kg) + EVT and 0.9 mg/kg alteplase + EVT were significant difference associated with higher successful reperfusion (TICI 2b-3) after the end of EVT (RR = 2.31; 95% CI 1.15-4.63; RR = 2.31; 95% CI 1.00-5.33; RR = 1.05; 95% CI 1.01-1.09). And compared to 0.25 mg/kg tenecteplase + EVT, alteplase (0.6 mg/kg and 0.9 mg/kg) + EVT were significant difference associated with lower successful reperfusion (TICI 2b-3) after the end of EVT (RR = 0.45; 95% CI 0.22-0.90; RR = 0.45; 95% CI 0.23-0.91). The risk of aICH (RR = 1.50; 95% CI 1.07-2.09) was significantly higher for 0.6 mg/kg alteplase + EVT than EVT alone. There was no significant difference in functional independence (mRS 0-2), excellent outcome (mRS 0-1), all-cause mortality or sICH among the different IVT strategies (0.25 mg/kg or 0.4 mg/kg tenecteplase and 0.6 mg/kg or 0.9 mg/kg alteplase) before EVT.ConclusionThe use of alteplase before EVT may potentially improve the successful reperfusion after EVT compared to tenecteplase. Due to the insufficient sample size, more high-quality RCTs are needed to confirm effectiveness and safety of tenecteplase compare to alteplase in patients before EVT.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42023470419.

Project description:Background and purpose: It is unclear whether endovascular thrombectomy alone compared with intravenous thrombolysis combination with endovascular thrombectomy can achieve similar neurological outcomes in patients with acute large vessel occlusion stroke. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare endovascular thrombectomy alone or intravenous thrombolysis plus endovascular thrombectomy in this population. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We restricted our search to randomized clinical trials that examined the clinical outcomes of endovascular thrombectomy alone vs. intravenous thrombolysis plus endovascular thrombectomy. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess study quality. Random-effects meta-analyses were used for evaluating all outcomes. Results: Total three randomized controlled trials with 1,092 individuals enrolled were included in the meta-analysis, including 543 (49.7%) who received endovascular thrombectomy alone and 549 (50.3%) who received intravenous thrombolysis plus endovascular thrombectomy. The primary outcome of 90-day functional independence (modified Rankin scale (mRS) score ≤ 2) was 44.6% (242/543) in the endovascular thrombectomy alone group vs. 42.8% (235/549) in the alteplase with endovascular thrombectomy group (odds ratio (OR), 1.08 [95% CI, 0.85-1.38]; P = 0.0539). Among pre-specified secondary outcomes, no significant between-group differences were found in excellent outcome (mRS score ≤ 1) (OR, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.85-1.47]; P = 0.418), mortality at 90 days (OR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.68-1.29]; P = 0.673), successful reperfusion (thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 2b-3) (OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.54-1.05]; P = 0.099), and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.45-1.15]; P = 0.171). Conclusions: Among patients with acute ischemic stroke in the anterior circulation within 4.5 h from the onset, endovascular thrombectomy alone was non-inferior to combined intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular thrombectomy.

Dataset Information

Endovascular Treatment With and Without Intravenous Thrombolysis in Large Vessel Occlusions Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets