Direct endovascular treatment versus bridging therapy in patients with acute ischemic stroke eligible for intravenous thrombolysis: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: In this review and meta-analysis we sought to compare the efficacy and safety of direct endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) and bridging therapy for intravenous thrombolysis (IVT)-eligible patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusions (AIS-LVO).
METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for published randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies providing outcomes of patients with IVT-eligible AIS-LVO who have undergone EVT with or without IVT. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-2 at 90 days. The secondary outcomes included the rates of (1) an excellent outcome defined as an mRS score of 0 or 1 at 90 days, (2) mortality at 90 days, (3) symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), (4) any type of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), (5) successful recanalization, and (6) clot migration.
RESULTS: We included three RCTs and six observational studies (4 of which were propensity score-adjusted studies) with a total of 3133 patients. In unadjusted and adjusted analyses, no differences in the rates of mRS scores 0-2, mRS scores 0-1, mortality at 90 days, sICH or successful recanalization were detected between patients with AIS-LVO who underwent direct EVT or bridging therapy. The patients treated with direct EVT had a lower risk ratio for any type of ICH and clot migration than did the patients treated with bridging therapy.
CONCLUSION: Compared with bridging therapy, direct EVT may be equally effective and yield a lower rate of ICH and clot migration in patients with AIS. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO: CRD42021236691. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.