Dataset Information

Effectiveness of intravenous r-tPA versus UK for acute ischaemic stroke: a nationwide prospective Chinese registry study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (r-tPA) and urokinase (UK) are both recommended for the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) in China, but with few comparative outcome data being available. We aimed to compare the outcomes of these two thrombolytic agents for the treatment of patients within 4.5 hours of onset of AIS in routine clinical practice in China.

Methods

A pre-planned, prospective, nationwide, multicentre, real-world registry of consecutive patients with AIS (age ≥18 years) who received r-tPA or UK within 4.5 hours of symptom onset according to local decision-making and guideline recommendations during 2017-2019. The primary effectiveness outcome was the proportion of patients with an excellent functional outcome (defined by modified Rankin scale scores 0 to 1) at 90 days. The key safety endpoint was symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage according to standard definitions. Multivariable logistic regression was used for comparative analysis, with adjustment according to propensity scores to ensure balance in baseline characteristics.

Results

Overall, 4130 patients with AIS were registered but 320 had incomplete or missing data, leaving 3810 with available data for analysis of whom 2666 received r-tPA (median dose 0.88 (IQR 0.78-0.90) mg/kg) and 1144 received UK (1.71 (1.43-2.00)×10⁴ international unit per kilogram). There were several significant intergroup differences in patient characteristics: r-tPA patients were more educated, had less history of stroke, lower systolic blood pressure, greater neurological impairment and shorter treatment times from symptom onset than UK patients. However, in adjusted analysis, the frequency of excellent outcome (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.40, p=0.052) and symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.47, p=0.344) were similar between groups.

Conclusions

UK may be as effective and carry a similar safety profile as r-tPA in treating mild to moderate AIS within guidelines in China. REGISTRATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. unique identifier: NCT02854592.

SUBMITTER: Wang X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8717806 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMost ischaemic strokes are caused by blockage of a cerebral artery by a thrombus. Intravenous administration of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator given within 4.5 hours is now standard treatment for this condition. Percutaneous vascular interventions use an intra-arterial, mechanical approach for thrombus disruption or removal (thrombectomy). Recent randomised trials indicate that percutaneous vascular interventions are superior to usual care (usual care usually included intravenous thrombolysis). However, intravenous thrombolysis was usually given in both arms of the trial and there was a lack of direct comparison of percutaneous vascular interventions with intravenous thrombolysis.ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness and safety of percutaneous vascular interventions compared with intravenous thrombolytic treatment for acute ischaemic stroke.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last search: August 2018). In addition, in September 2017, we searched the following electronic databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index; and Stroke Trials Registry, and US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) that directly compared a percutaneous vascular intervention with intravenous thrombolytic treatment in people with acute ischaemic stroke.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We obtained both published and unpublished data. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.Main resultsWe included four trials with 450 participants. Data on functional outcome and death at end of follow-up were available for 443 participants from three trials. Compared with intravenous thrombolytic therapy, percutaneous vascular intervention did not improve the proportion of participants with good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 2, risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.25, P = 0.92). The quality of evidence was low (outcome assessment was blinded, but not the treating physician or participants). At the end of follow-up, there was a non-significant increase in the proportion of participants who died in the percutaneous vascular intervention group (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.14, P = 0.21). The quality of evidence was low (wide confidence interval). There was no difference in the proportion of participants with symptomatic intracranial haemorrhages between the intervention and control groups (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.95, P = 0.97). The quality of evidence was low (wide confidence interval). Data on vascular status (recanalisation rate) were only available for seven participants from one trial; we considered this inadequate for statistical analyses.Authors' conclusionsThe present review directly compared intravenous thrombolytic treatment with percutaneous vascular interventions for ischaemic stroke. We found no evidence from RCTs that percutaneous vascular interventions are superior to intravenous thrombolytic treatment with respect to functional outcome. Quality of evidence was low (outcome assessment was blinded, but not the treating physician or participants). New trials with adequate sample sizes are warranted because of the rapid development of new techniques and devices for such interventions.

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.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:The relationship of anticoagulation therapies with stroke severity and outcomes have been well documented in the literature. However, none of the previous research has reported the relationship of atrial fibrillation (AF)/anticoagulation therapies with urinary tract infection (UTI), pneumonia and length of stay in hyperacute stroke units (HASUs). The present study aimed to evaluate AF and anticoagulation status in relation to early outcomes in 1387 men (median age=75?years, IQR=65-83) and 1371 women (median age=83?years, IQR=74-89) admitted with acute ischaemic stroke to HASUs in Surrey between 2014 and 2016. METHODS:We conducted this registry-based, prospective cohort study using data from the Sentinel Stroke National Audit Programme. Association between AF anticoagulation status with severe stroke on arrival (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ?16), prolonged HASU stay (>3?weeks), UTI and pneumonia within 7?days of admission, severe disability on discharge (modified Rankin Scale score=4?and 5) and inpatient mortality was assessed by logistic regression, adjusted for age, sex, hypertension, congestive heart failure, diabetes and previous stroke. RESULTS:Compared with patients with stroke who are free from AF, those with AF without anticoagulation had an increased adjusted risk of having more severe stroke: 5.8%?versus 14.0%, OR=2.4 (95%?CI 1.6 to 3.6, P<0.001), prolonged HASU stay: 21.5%?versus 32.0%, OR=1.4 (1.0-2.0, P=0.027), pneumonia: 8.2%?versus 19.1%, OR=2.1 (1.4-2.9, P<0.001), more severe disability: 24.2%?versus 40.4%, OR=1.6 (1.2-2.1, P=0.004) and mortality: 9.3%?versus 21.7%, OR=1.9 (1.4-2.8, P<0.001), and AF patients with anticoagulation also had greater risk for having UTI: 8.6%?versus 12.3%, OR=1.9 (1.2-3.0, P=0.004), pneumonia: 8.2%?versus 11.5%, OR=1.6 (1.1-2.4, P=0.025) and mortality: 9.7%?versus 21.7%, OR=1.9 (1.4-2.8, P<0.001). The median HASU stay for stroke patients with AF without anticoagulation was 10.6 days (IQR=2.8-26.4) compared with 5.8 days (IQR=2.3-17.5) for those free from AF (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with AF, particularly those without anticoagulation, are at increased risk of severe stroke, associated with prolonged HASU stay and increased risk of early infection, disability and mortality.

Project description:Background and Purpose- Telemedicine is increasingly utilized for intravenous tPA (tissue-type plasminogen activator) delivery. The comparative safety of leaving tPA-treated patients at a presenting (spoke) hospital (drip-and-stay) or transferring patients to a central treating (hub) hospital (drip-and-ship) is not established. We sought to compare outcomes between drip-and-ship and drip-and-stay patients treated with tPA via telemedicine. We hypothesized that there would be no differences in short-term outcomes of in-hospital mortality, length of stay, or discharge disposition or in 90-day outcomes between groups. Methods- We retrospectively identified patients treated with tPA at 17 spoke hospitals between September 2015 and December 2016. Demographic, clinical, and outcome data were obtained from a prospective telemedicine registry. We used negative binomial, multinomial, and logistic regression analyses to evaluate length of stay, discharge disposition, and inpatient mortality, respectively. We compared the proportion of patients with 90-day modified Rankin Scale score <2 by group. Results- Among 430 tPA-treated patients, 232 (53.9%) were transferred to the hub after treatment. The median arrival National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was higher for drip-and-ship (10; interquartile range, 5-18) compared with drip-and-stay patients (6; interquartile range, 4-10; P<0.001). Unadjusted length of stay was longer in drip-and-stay patients (incidence rate ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71-0.95). There were no significant differences in adjusted length of stay, hospital mortality, or discharge disposition. Among the 64% of patients with complete 90-day modified Rankin Scale score, the proportion with good outcomes (modified Rankin Scale score <2) did not differ between groups. Conclusions- We found no differences in measured outcomes between drip-and-ship and drip-and-stay patients treated in our network, although our study may be underpowered to detect small differences.

Project description:Background and Purpose- Although there are no trials or large cohorts to inform clinical care, current guidelines caution against giving intravenous tPA (tissue-type plasminogen activator) to patients with acute ischemic stroke who are taking non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). We performed a literature review of intravenous tPA in patients treated with NOACs preceding stroke. Methods- A literature search of PubMed was performed encompassing January 2010 to March 2018. Patient characteristics, timing of last medication intake, laboratory testing, use of reversal, and outcomes ?3 months after discharge were summarized. Results- We identified 55 studies with 492 NOAC patients receiving tPA (dabigatran, 181; rivaroxaban, 215; apixaban, 40; and unspecified NOAC, 56). Among patients with complete data, the median time from the last NOAC intake to symptom onset was 8 hours (interquartile range, 2.5-14.5), with 55.2% (80/145) within 12 hours. Few patients underwent sensitive laboratory tests, such as thrombin time, diluted thrombin time, or anti-Xa assays before tPA administration. The overall observed rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, mortality, and favorable outcomes (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, ?1; modified Rankin Scale score, 0-2; or neurological improvement in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, ?8 points) were 4.3% (20/462), 11.3% (48/423), and 43.7% (164/375), respectively. Among dabigatran-treated patients, reversal with idarucizumab was associated with fewer symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (4.5% [2/44] versus 7.4% [8/108]; unadjusted odds ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.12-2.92), death (4.5% [2/44] versus 12.0% [13/108]; unadjusted odds ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.08-1.61), and more favorable outcomes (79.1% [34/43] versus 39.2% [29/74]; unadjusted odds ratio, 5.86; 95% CI, 2.45-14.00), although the differences were not statistically significant for symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and death. Conclusions- These preliminary observations suggest that tPA may be reasonably well tolerated without prohibitive risks of bleeding complications in selected patients on NOACs. Reversal of anticoagulant effects by idarucizumab for dabigatran-treated patients before tPA is an emerging strategy that was associated with more favorable outcomes.