Efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment versus intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
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 th...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2013-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3814965?pdf=render |
| _version_ | 1818385944744558592 |
|---|---|
| author | Chao Lin Nan Li Kang Wang Xin Zhao Bai-Qiang Li Lei Sun Yi-Xing Lin Jie-Mei Fan Miao Zhang Hai-Chen Sun |
| author_facet | Chao Lin Nan Li Kang Wang Xin Zhao Bai-Qiang Li Lei Sun Yi-Xing Lin Jie-Mei Fan Miao Zhang Hai-Chen Sun |
| author_sort | Chao Lin |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | 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. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-14T03:46:12Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-8c8f52b6cad3496ea66768ac74352b6d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-14T03:46:12Z |
| publishDate | 2013-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj.art-8c8f52b6cad3496ea66768ac74352b6d2022-12-21T23:18:20ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032013-01-01810e7784910.1371/journal.pone.0077849Efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment versus intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Chao LinNan LiKang WangXin ZhaoBai-Qiang LiLei SunYi-Xing LinJie-Mei FanMiao ZhangHai-Chen SunBACKGROUND 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.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3814965?pdf=render |
| spellingShingle | Chao Lin Nan Li Kang Wang Xin Zhao Bai-Qiang Li Lei Sun Yi-Xing Lin Jie-Mei Fan Miao Zhang Hai-Chen Sun Efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment versus intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS ONE |
| title | Efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment versus intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. |
| title_full | Efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment versus intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. |
| title_fullStr | Efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment versus intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment versus intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. |
| title_short | Efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment versus intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. |
| title_sort | efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment versus intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke a meta analysis of randomized controlled trials |
| url | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3814965?pdf=render |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT chaolin efficacyandsafetyofendovasculartreatmentversusintravenousthrombolysisforacuteischemicstrokeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT nanli efficacyandsafetyofendovasculartreatmentversusintravenousthrombolysisforacuteischemicstrokeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT kangwang efficacyandsafetyofendovasculartreatmentversusintravenousthrombolysisforacuteischemicstrokeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT xinzhao efficacyandsafetyofendovasculartreatmentversusintravenousthrombolysisforacuteischemicstrokeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT baiqiangli efficacyandsafetyofendovasculartreatmentversusintravenousthrombolysisforacuteischemicstrokeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT leisun efficacyandsafetyofendovasculartreatmentversusintravenousthrombolysisforacuteischemicstrokeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT yixinglin efficacyandsafetyofendovasculartreatmentversusintravenousthrombolysisforacuteischemicstrokeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT jiemeifan efficacyandsafetyofendovasculartreatmentversusintravenousthrombolysisforacuteischemicstrokeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT miaozhang efficacyandsafetyofendovasculartreatmentversusintravenousthrombolysisforacuteischemicstrokeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT haichensun efficacyandsafetyofendovasculartreatmentversusintravenousthrombolysisforacuteischemicstrokeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials |