Intravenous thrombolysis or antiplatelet therapy for acute nondisabling ischemic stroke: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

IF 5.8 3区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY European Stroke Journal Pub Date : 2024-10-26 DOI:10.1177/23969873241293323
François Lun, Lina Palaiodimou, Aristeidis H Katsanos, Georgios Tsivgoulis, Guillaume Turc
{"title":"Intravenous thrombolysis or antiplatelet therapy for acute nondisabling ischemic stroke: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"François Lun, Lina Palaiodimou, Aristeidis H Katsanos, Georgios Tsivgoulis, Guillaume Turc","doi":"10.1177/23969873241293323","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Uncertainties remain on the optimal treatment for acute minor stroke with nondisabling symptoms. The two most common therapeutic approaches are intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and antiplatelet therapy, notably dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). We synthesized data from the literature to compare IVT to DAPT and identify the best treatment for this population.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We systematically searched Pubmed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library for randomized trials and observational studies comparing IVT, aspirin, and/or DAPT, started within 24 h of symptom onset in patients with minor stroke (NIHSS ⩽ 5) and nondisabling symptoms. Random-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. The primary outcome was excellent functional outcome at 3 months (mRS 0-1). Secondary outcomes included mRS 0-2, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, mortality, and recurrent stroke.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Four randomized trials and 2 observational studies (5897 patients for the analysis of the primary outcome) were included. Compared with IVT (alteplase), DAPT (clopidogrel + aspirin) was significantly associated with higher odds of mRS 0-1 (OR = 1.52, 95% CrI, 1.09-2.35), but aspirin alone was not (OR = 1.36, 95% CrI, 0.87-2.30). DAPT was also associated with lower odds of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage than alteplase (OR = 0.14, 95% CrI, 0.03-0.91). There were no significant differences between treatment groups regarding the other outcomes. For each outcome, the ranking for the best treatment was DAPT, then aspirin, and then IVT.</p><p><strong>Discussion/conclusion: </strong>This network meta-analysis suggests that DAPT may be the optimal treatment for acute nondisabling stroke, with higher odds of excellent functional outcome compared with IVT.Registration: PROSPERO ID: CRD42024522038.</p>","PeriodicalId":46821,"journal":{"name":"European Stroke Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Stroke Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23969873241293323","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Uncertainties remain on the optimal treatment for acute minor stroke with nondisabling symptoms. The two most common therapeutic approaches are intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and antiplatelet therapy, notably dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). We synthesized data from the literature to compare IVT to DAPT and identify the best treatment for this population.

Method: We systematically searched Pubmed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library for randomized trials and observational studies comparing IVT, aspirin, and/or DAPT, started within 24 h of symptom onset in patients with minor stroke (NIHSS ⩽ 5) and nondisabling symptoms. Random-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. The primary outcome was excellent functional outcome at 3 months (mRS 0-1). Secondary outcomes included mRS 0-2, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, mortality, and recurrent stroke.

Findings: Four randomized trials and 2 observational studies (5897 patients for the analysis of the primary outcome) were included. Compared with IVT (alteplase), DAPT (clopidogrel + aspirin) was significantly associated with higher odds of mRS 0-1 (OR = 1.52, 95% CrI, 1.09-2.35), but aspirin alone was not (OR = 1.36, 95% CrI, 0.87-2.30). DAPT was also associated with lower odds of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage than alteplase (OR = 0.14, 95% CrI, 0.03-0.91). There were no significant differences between treatment groups regarding the other outcomes. For each outcome, the ranking for the best treatment was DAPT, then aspirin, and then IVT.

Discussion/conclusion: This network meta-analysis suggests that DAPT may be the optimal treatment for acute nondisabling stroke, with higher odds of excellent functional outcome compared with IVT.Registration: PROSPERO ID: CRD42024522038.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
静脉溶栓或抗血小板治疗急性非致残性缺血性脑卒中:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。
目的:对于伴有非致残症状的急性轻微卒中的最佳治疗方法仍存在不确定性。两种最常见的治疗方法是静脉溶栓(IVT)和抗血小板治疗,尤其是双重抗血小板治疗(DAPT)。我们综合了文献中的数据,对静脉溶栓疗法和 DAPT 进行了比较,并确定了这一人群的最佳治疗方法:我们系统地检索了 Pubmed、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 图书馆的随机试验和观察性研究,比较了轻微卒中(NIHSS ⩽5)和非致残症状患者在症状发作 24 小时内开始的 IVT、阿司匹林和/或 DAPT。研究进行了随机效应贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。主要结果是 3 个月时的良好功能预后(mRS 0-1)。次要结果包括 mRS 0-2、症状性颅内出血、死亡率和复发性中风:研究结果:共纳入 4 项随机试验和 2 项观察性研究(主要结果分析对象为 5897 名患者)。与 IVT(阿替普酶)相比,DAPT(氯吡格雷+阿司匹林)与更高的 mRS 0-1 机率显著相关(OR = 1.52,95% CrI,1.09-2.35),但单用阿司匹林则不然(OR = 1.36,95% CrI,0.87-2.30)。与阿替普酶相比,DAPT也能降低症状性颅内出血的几率(OR = 0.14,95% CrI,0.03-0.91)。在其他结果方面,治疗组之间没有明显差异。对于每种结果,最佳治疗的排名依次为DAPT、阿司匹林和IVT:该网络荟萃分析表明,DAPT 可能是急性非致残性卒中的最佳治疗方法,与 IVT 相比,DAPT 有更高的卓越功能预后几率:PROSPERO ID:CRD42024522038。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
6.60%
发文量
102
期刊介绍: Launched in 2016 the European Stroke Journal (ESJ) is the official journal of the European Stroke Organisation (ESO), a professional non-profit organization with over 1,400 individual members, and affiliations to numerous related national and international societies. ESJ covers clinical stroke research from all fields, including clinical trials, epidemiology, primary and secondary prevention, diagnosis, acute and post-acute management, guidelines, translation of experimental findings into clinical practice, rehabilitation, organisation of stroke care, and societal impact. It is open to authors from all relevant medical and health professions. Article types include review articles, original research, protocols, guidelines, editorials and letters to the Editor. Through ESJ, authors and researchers have gained a new platform for the rapid and professional publication of peer reviewed scientific material of the highest standards; publication in ESJ is highly competitive. The journal and its editorial team has developed excellent cooperation with sister organisations such as the World Stroke Organisation and the International Journal of Stroke, and the American Heart Organization/American Stroke Association and the journal Stroke. ESJ is fully peer-reviewed and is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Issues are published 4 times a year (March, June, September and December) and articles are published OnlineFirst prior to issue publication.
期刊最新文献
Incident dementia in ischaemic stroke patients with early cardiac complications: A propensity-score matched cohort study. Comparing the properties of traditional and novel approaches to the modified Rankin scale: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Impact of smoke-free legislation on stroke risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Initial blood pressure and adverse cardiac events following acute ischaemic stroke: An individual patient data pooled analysis from the VISTA database. Outcomes of different anesthesia techniques in nonagenarians treated with mechanical thrombectomy for anterior circulation large vessel occlusion: An inverse probability weighting analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1