Wen SY, Chen FF, Chen XT, Zhang Q, Zhou CQ. Repeated intravenous thrombolysis in recurrent ischemic stroke within 3 months: a systematic review.
BMC Neurol 2023;
23:422. [PMID:
38012577 PMCID:
PMC10680229 DOI:
10.1186/s12883-023-03472-4]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2023] [Accepted: 11/20/2023] [Indexed: 11/29/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Repeated intravenous thrombolysis (RIVT) within 3 months is an off-guideline therapy, however, may be an effective and safe way to treat early recurrent ischemic stroke. This study was conducted to assess the potential influencing factors on the efficacy and safety of RIVT in recurrent ischemic stroke within 3 months and to explore the strategy of RIVT within 3 months.
METHODS
PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database were searched for cases of RIVT in recurrent ischemic stroke within 3 months up to February 1, 2023. Clinical characteristics were compared and analyzed between the good-outcome and poor-outcome groups and between the symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and non-sICH groups respectively.
RESULTS
A total of 16 studies including 24 cases of RIVT within 3 months were retrospectively analyzed in the present study. The patients' ages ranged from 42 to 87 years (median 73.5 years) and the intervals between thrombolysis were from 0.25 to 90 days (median 9.5 days). Comparing the clinical characteristics between the good-outcome group and the poor-outcome group, no statistically significant differences were found (P > 0.05), but the differences in baseline National Institutes of Health stroke scale (NIHSS) score of the recurrent stroke (P = 0.056) and good outcome after the previous IVT (P = 0.054) nearly reached statistical significance. Comparing the data between the non-sICH group and the sICH group, statistically significant differences were found in terms of the proportion of cardiogenic embolism (P = 0.036), baseline NIHSS score in the recurrent stroke (P = 0.007) and the interval between thrombolysis (P = 0.041), but no significant difference was found by regression analysis.
CONCLUSION
In patients with recurrent ischemic stroke within 3 months, those with a good outcome after the previous IVT and a low baseline NIHSS score in the recurrent stroke may be considered for RIVT, whereas those with a high baseline NIHSS score, a short interval between thrombolysis, and cardiogenic embolism may suffer a higher risk of sICH. Due to sample size and publication bias, more studies with larger sample sizes and more rigorous designs are needed to confirm this conclusion.
Collapse