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 |
id |
doaj-8c8f52b6cad3496ea66768ac74352b6d |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-8c8f52b6cad3496ea66768ac74352b6d2020-11-25T02:33:49ZengPublic 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 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
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 |
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 |
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 |
title |
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_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_sort |
efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment versus intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS ONE |
issn |
1932-6203 |
publishDate |
2013-01-01 |
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. |
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 |
_version_ |
1724812326894305280 |