Konark Malhotra1, Aristeidis H Katsanos1, Nitin Goyal1, Niaz Ahmed1, Daniel Strbian1, Lina Palaiodimou1, Theodore Karapanayiotides1, Anne W Alexandrov1, James C Grotta1, Andrei V Alexandrov1, Georgios Tsivgoulis2. 1. From the Department of Neurology (K.M.), Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Neurology (A.H.K.), University of Ioannina School of Medicine, Greece; Department of Neurology (N.G., A.W.A., A.V.A, G.T.), University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis; Department of Neurology (N.A.), Karolinska University Hospital; Department of Clinical Neuroscience (N.A.), Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Neurology (D.S.), Helsinki University Central Hospital, Finland; Second Department of Neurology (A.H.K., L.P., G.T.), National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, "Attikon" University Hospital; Second Department of Neurology (T.K.), AHEPA University Hospital, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece; and Clinical Innovation and Research Institute (J.C.G.), Memorial Hermann Hospital-Texas Medical Center, Houston. 2. From the Department of Neurology (K.M.), Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Neurology (A.H.K.), University of Ioannina School of Medicine, Greece; Department of Neurology (N.G., A.W.A., A.V.A, G.T.), University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis; Department of Neurology (N.A.), Karolinska University Hospital; Department of Clinical Neuroscience (N.A.), Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Neurology (D.S.), Helsinki University Central Hospital, Finland; Second Department of Neurology (A.H.K., L.P., G.T.), National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, "Attikon" University Hospital; Second Department of Neurology (T.K.), AHEPA University Hospital, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece; and Clinical Innovation and Research Institute (J.C.G.), Memorial Hermann Hospital-Texas Medical Center, Houston. tsivgoulisgiorg@yahoo.gr.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Conflicting data exist on the safety and efficacy of IV thrombolysis (IVT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) receiving dual antiplatelet pretreatment (DAPP). The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the safety and outcome of DAPP history among patients with AIS treated with IVT. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature review to identify studies that investigated the safety and efficacy of DAPP among patients with AIS treated with IVT. RESULTS: We identified 9 studies comprising 66,675 patients. In unadjusted analyses, DAPP was associated with a higher likelihood of pooled symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH; odds ratio [OR] 2.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.39-3.67) and 3-month mortality (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.25-1.73). DAPP was also related to higher odds of sICH according to Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke Monitoring Study (OR 2.71; 95% CI 2.05-3.59), European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study II (OR 2.23; 95% CI 1.46-3.40), and National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.38-1.83) definitions. There was no association between DAPP and 3-month favorable functional outcome (FFO, modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score 0-1) and 3-month functional independence (FI; mRS score 0-2). In adjusted analyses, history of DAPP was not associated with pooled sICH (OR 2.03; 95% CI 0.75-5.52), 3-month mortality (OR 1.11; 95% CI 0.87-1.40), 3-month FFO (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.77-1.09), and 3-month FI (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.89-1.15). CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for potential confounders, DAPP appears not to be associated with higher risk of adverse outcomes in patients with AIS treated with IVT.
OBJECTIVE: Conflicting data exist on the safety and efficacy of IV thrombolysis (IVT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) receiving dual antiplatelet pretreatment (DAPP). The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the safety and outcome of DAPP history among patients with AIS treated with IVT. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature review to identify studies that investigated the safety and efficacy of DAPP among patients with AIS treated with IVT. RESULTS: We identified 9 studies comprising 66,675 patients. In unadjusted analyses, DAPP was associated with a higher likelihood of pooled symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH; odds ratio [OR] 2.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.39-3.67) and 3-month mortality (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.25-1.73). DAPP was also related to higher odds of sICH according to Safe Implementation of Treatments in Stroke Monitoring Study (OR 2.71; 95% CI 2.05-3.59), European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study II (OR 2.23; 95% CI 1.46-3.40), and National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.38-1.83) definitions. There was no association between DAPP and 3-month favorable functional outcome (FFO, modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score 0-1) and 3-month functional independence (FI; mRS score 0-2). In adjusted analyses, history of DAPP was not associated with pooled sICH (OR 2.03; 95% CI 0.75-5.52), 3-month mortality (OR 1.11; 95% CI 0.87-1.40), 3-month FFO (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.77-1.09), and 3-month FI (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.89-1.15). CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for potential confounders, DAPP appears not to be associated with higher risk of adverse outcomes in patients with AIS treated with IVT.
Authors: Eivind Berge; William Whiteley; Heinrich Audebert; Gian Marco De Marchis; Ana Catarina Fonseca; Chiara Padiglioni; Natalia Pérez de la Ossa; Daniel Strbian; Georgios Tsivgoulis; Guillaume Turc Journal: Eur Stroke J Date: 2021-02-19
Authors: Benedikt M Frey; Florent Boutitie; Bastian Cheng; Tae-Hee Cho; Martin Ebinger; Matthias Endres; Jochen B Fiebach; Jens Fiehler; Ian Ford; Ivana Galinovic; Alina Königsberg; Josep Puig; Pascal Roy; Anke Wouters; Tim Magnus; Vincent Thijs; Robin Lemmens; Keith W Muir; Norbert Nighoghossian; Salvador Pedraza; Claus Z Simonsen; Christian Gerloff; Götz Thomalla Journal: Neurol Res Pract Date: 2020-11-20