急性轻微缺血性卒中成人患者的双联抗血小板疗法与阿替普酶:系统回顾与元分析》。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-09 DOI:10.1007/s11239-024-02994-z
Patricia Viana, Jessica Hoffmann Relvas, Thamiris Dias Delfino Cabral, Jorge Eduardo Persson, Artur Menegaz de Almeida, Marina Persson, Marcos Vinícius Oliveira Marques, Jamary Oliveira-Filho
{"title":"急性轻微缺血性卒中成人患者的双联抗血小板疗法与阿替普酶:系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Patricia Viana, Jessica Hoffmann Relvas, Thamiris Dias Delfino Cabral, Jorge Eduardo Persson, Artur Menegaz de Almeida, Marina Persson, Marcos Vinícius Oliveira Marques, Jamary Oliveira-Filho","doi":"10.1007/s11239-024-02994-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) relative to intravenous (IV) alteplase in patients with acute minor ischemic stroke are insufficiently established. Therefore, we aimed to perform a meta-analysis to compare DAPT with IV alteplase in patients with acute minor stroke. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane were searched for studies comparing DAPT with IV alteplase in patients with minor stroke. Functional and safety outcomes in 90 days were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using Rstudio 4.3.1. Subanalyses were performed restricted to non-disabling minor strokes and NIHSS score ≤ 3. PROSPERO (CRD42023440986). We included five studies with a total of 6,340 patients, of whom 4,050 (63.9%) received DAPT. The follow-up period for all included studies was 90 days. There was no significant difference for individual outcomes of mRS 0-1 (OR 1.26; 95% CI 0.85-1.89; p = 0.25), mRS 0-2 (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.69-1.43; p = 0.97), or all-cause mortality (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.20-3.13; p = 0.75) between groups. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) was significantly lower (OR 0.11; 95% CI 0.003-0.36; p < 0.001) in patients treated with DAPT compared with IV alteplase. In terms of mRS 0-1 and mRS 0-2, we found no significant difference in both subgroup analyses. We found no statistically significant difference between DAPT and IV alteplase regarding functional outcome (mRS scores of 0-1 and 0-2) or all-cause mortality at 90 days in patients with minor ischemic stroke. Additionally, DAPT was associated with a significantly lower rate of sICH.</p>","PeriodicalId":17546,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis","volume":" ","pages":"929-935"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dual Antiplatelet Therapy vs Alteplase in Adult Patients with Acute Minor Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Patricia Viana, Jessica Hoffmann Relvas, Thamiris Dias Delfino Cabral, Jorge Eduardo Persson, Artur Menegaz de Almeida, Marina Persson, Marcos Vinícius Oliveira Marques, Jamary Oliveira-Filho\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11239-024-02994-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) relative to intravenous (IV) alteplase in patients with acute minor ischemic stroke are insufficiently established. Therefore, we aimed to perform a meta-analysis to compare DAPT with IV alteplase in patients with acute minor stroke. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane were searched for studies comparing DAPT with IV alteplase in patients with minor stroke. Functional and safety outcomes in 90 days were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using Rstudio 4.3.1. Subanalyses were performed restricted to non-disabling minor strokes and NIHSS score ≤ 3. PROSPERO (CRD42023440986). We included five studies with a total of 6,340 patients, of whom 4,050 (63.9%) received DAPT. The follow-up period for all included studies was 90 days. There was no significant difference for individual outcomes of mRS 0-1 (OR 1.26; 95% CI 0.85-1.89; p = 0.25), mRS 0-2 (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.69-1.43; p = 0.97), or all-cause mortality (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.20-3.13; p = 0.75) between groups. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) was significantly lower (OR 0.11; 95% CI 0.003-0.36; p < 0.001) in patients treated with DAPT compared with IV alteplase. In terms of mRS 0-1 and mRS 0-2, we found no significant difference in both subgroup analyses. We found no statistically significant difference between DAPT and IV alteplase regarding functional outcome (mRS scores of 0-1 and 0-2) or all-cause mortality at 90 days in patients with minor ischemic stroke. Additionally, DAPT was associated with a significantly lower rate of sICH.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17546,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"929-935\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11239-024-02994-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11239-024-02994-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在急性轻微缺血性卒中患者中,双联抗血小板疗法(DAPT)相对于静脉注射阿替普酶的有效性和安全性尚未得到充分证实。因此,我们旨在进行一项荟萃分析,比较 DAPT 与静脉注射阿替普酶对急性轻微卒中患者的疗效。我们在 MEDLINE、Embase 和 Cochrane 中检索了对轻微卒中患者进行 DAPT 与静脉注射阿替普酶比较的研究。对 90 天内的功能和安全性结果进行了分析。统计分析使用 Rstudio 4.3.1 进行。子分析仅限于非致残性轻微脑卒中和 NIHSS 评分≤ 3 分的患者。prospero(CRD42023440986)。我们纳入了五项研究,共有 6340 名患者,其中 4050 人(63.9%)接受了 DAPT 治疗。所有纳入研究的随访期均为 90 天。在 mRS 0-1 (OR 1.26; 95% CI 0.85-1.89; p = 0.25)、mRS 0-2 (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.69-1.43; p = 0.97)或全因死亡率(OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.20-3.13; p = 0.75)等单项结果上,各组间无明显差异。症状性颅内出血(sICH)明显降低(OR 0.11; 95% CI 0.003-0.36; p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Dual Antiplatelet Therapy vs Alteplase in Adult Patients with Acute Minor Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) relative to intravenous (IV) alteplase in patients with acute minor ischemic stroke are insufficiently established. Therefore, we aimed to perform a meta-analysis to compare DAPT with IV alteplase in patients with acute minor stroke. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane were searched for studies comparing DAPT with IV alteplase in patients with minor stroke. Functional and safety outcomes in 90 days were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using Rstudio 4.3.1. Subanalyses were performed restricted to non-disabling minor strokes and NIHSS score ≤ 3. PROSPERO (CRD42023440986). We included five studies with a total of 6,340 patients, of whom 4,050 (63.9%) received DAPT. The follow-up period for all included studies was 90 days. There was no significant difference for individual outcomes of mRS 0-1 (OR 1.26; 95% CI 0.85-1.89; p = 0.25), mRS 0-2 (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.69-1.43; p = 0.97), or all-cause mortality (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.20-3.13; p = 0.75) between groups. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) was significantly lower (OR 0.11; 95% CI 0.003-0.36; p < 0.001) in patients treated with DAPT compared with IV alteplase. In terms of mRS 0-1 and mRS 0-2, we found no significant difference in both subgroup analyses. We found no statistically significant difference between DAPT and IV alteplase regarding functional outcome (mRS scores of 0-1 and 0-2) or all-cause mortality at 90 days in patients with minor ischemic stroke. Additionally, DAPT was associated with a significantly lower rate of sICH.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
112
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis is a long-awaited resource for contemporary cardiologists, hematologists, vascular medicine specialists and clinician-scientists actively involved in treatment decisions and clinical investigation of thrombotic disorders involving the cardiovascular and cerebrovascular systems. The principal focus of the Journal centers on the pathobiology of thrombosis and vascular disorders and the use of anticoagulants, platelet antagonists, cell-based therapies and interventions in scientific investigation, clinical-translational research and patient care. The Journal will publish original work which emphasizes the interface between fundamental scientific principles and clinical investigation, stimulating an interdisciplinary and scholarly dialogue in thrombosis and vascular science. Published works will also define platforms for translational research, drug development, clinical trials and patient-directed applications. The Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis'' integrated format will expand the reader''s knowledge base and provide important insights for both the investigation and direct clinical application of the most rapidly growing fields in medicine-thrombosis and vascular science.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the causal inference of inflammatory bowel disease and ischemic stroke: a bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization study. Assessment of anticoagulant safety and coagulation analysis in mice using the VETSCAN® VSpro analyzer. Correction: Factor XIa inhibition as a therapeutic strategy for atherothrombosis. Evaluation of unfractionated heparin therapy for venous thromboembolism using adjusted body weight in elderly or higher weight patients. Letter by Pirera et al regarding the paper "Direct oral anticoagulants in embolic stroke of undetermined source: an updated meta-analysis" by Marinheiro and colleagues.
×
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