Repeated Systemic Thrombolysis After Early Recurrent Stroke: Always Hazardous?

Repeated intravenous thrombolysis in recurrent ischemic stroke within 3 months: a systematic review

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.

Ultraearly repeated systemic thrombolysis in recurrent ischemic stroke - A multicentre case study

OBJECTIVE

We analysed outcomes of patients who received off-label repeated thrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator for ischemic stroke recurrence within 10 days (ultraearly repeated thrombolysis, UERT).

METHOD

We identified patients receiving UERT from the prospective telestroke network of South-East Bavaria (TEMPiS) registry and by database search (Pubmed, Google scholar). Corresponding authors were contacted for further details. Baseline demographic data and clinical, laboratory, and imaging findings were analysed in a multicentric case study.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients receiving UERT were identified. The median time between first and second thrombolysis was 3.5 days. In patients with available data, second thrombolysis achieved an early clinical improvement (NIHSS reduction ≥4 points) in 12 of 14 (85.7%) and a favourable outcome (mRS 0-2 after 3 months) in 11 of 16 (68.8%) patients. Intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) occurred in 4 patients (25.0%) with one fatal large parenchymatous haemorrhage (6.3%). Neither allergic reactions nor other immunoreactive events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In our analysis UERT led to early clinical improvement and a favourable clinical outcome in a high percentage of patients with ICH rates comparable to prior publications. UERT might be considered in patients with early recurrent stroke under careful risk-benefit assessment.

Repeated intravenous thrombolysis in early recurrent stroke secondary to carotid web: Case report

Intravenous thrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) is the first effective approved treatment for reducing ischemic stroke disability, and having a stroke within 3 months is usually a contraindication to thrombolysis. In this paper, we describe the case of a 58-year-old patient who received repeated intravenous thrombolysis at 10 days interval for a recurrent ischemic stroke, with dramatic improvement. The carotid diaphragm was behind this recurrent stroke and it was treated by stenting.

Safety and Outcomes of Intravenous tPA in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients With Prior Stroke Within 3 Months: Findings From Get With The Guidelines-Stroke

Background Guidelines recommend against the use of intravenous tPA (tissue-type plasminogen activator; IV tPA) in acute ischemic stroke patients with prior ischemic stroke within 3 months. However, there are limited data on the safety of IV tPA in this population. Methods and Results A retrospective observational study of patients ≥66 years of age linked to Medicare claims and treated with IV tPA at Get With The Guidelines-Stroke hospitals (February 2009 to December 2015). We identified 293 patients treated with IV tPA who had a prior ischemic stroke within 3 months and 30 655 with no history of stroke. Patients with prior stroke had a higher stroke severity (median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, 11 [6-19] versus 11 [6-18]; absolute standardized difference, 11.2%) and a higher prevalence of cardiovascular comorbidities. Patients with prior stroke had a higher unadjusted risk for symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (7.7% versus 4.8%) and in-hospital mortality (12.6% versus 8.9%), but these differences were not statistically significant after adjustment. When stratified by prespecified time epochs, the elevated risk for symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was seen only within the first 14 days (16.3% versus 4.8%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.7 [95% CI, 1.62-8.43]) but not in other epochs (2.1% versus 4.8%; aOR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.05-2.79] for 15-30 days and 7.4% versus 4.8%; aOR, 1.36 [95% CI, 0.77-2.40] for 31-90 days). In addition, patients with prior stroke were significantly more likely to have a combined outcome of in-hospital mortality or discharge to hospice (25.9% versus 17.0%; aOR, 1.70 [95% CI, 1.21-2.38]), less likely to be discharged to home (28.3% versus 32.3%; aOR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.54-0.98]), or to have good functional outcomes at discharge (modified Rankin Scale, 0-1; 11.3% versus 20.0%; aOR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.24-0.89]). Conclusions Stroke providers need to continue to be vigilant about the safety of IV tPA in patients with prior stroke, particularly those with an event in the previous 14 days.

Why not Intravenous Thrombolysis in Patients with Recurrent Stroke within 3 Months?

Acute ischemic stroke continues to be a very severe disorder that has significant impact on human health. Its treatment options are limited and alteplase remains the only American Food and Drug Administration-approved drug for patients with acute ischemic stroke. Furthermore, intravenous thrombolysis remains substantially underutilized, because it has rigorous indications and contraindications. Most patients simply do not meet these criteria and cannot receive thrombolytic treatment. Guidelines in many countries currently include a history of stroke within months as one of the exclusion criteria for intravenous thrombolysis. Although this is based on previous data, it lacks strong evidentiary support. Several recent studies suggested that intravenous thrombolysis may be beneficial for this patient population. We reviewed relevant publications of intravenous thrombolysis or repeated intravenous thrombolysis in patients with a history of stroke in the past 3 months. We found that intravenous thrombolysis in these patients is not as hazardous as previously believed. Among patients with relatively small infarctions and a good prognosis, intravenous thrombolysis may be a good treatment option. We hope that more research will be carried out on this topic to reexamine the criteria for intravenous thrombolysis to allow more patients to benefit from treatment.

Update on the effects of treatment with recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (rt-PA) in acute ischemic stroke

INTRODUCTION

Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) represents a major cause of death and disability all over the world. The recommended therapy aims at dissolving the clot to re-establish quickly the blood flow to the brain and reduce neuronal injury. Intravenous administration of recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (rt-PA) is clinically used with this goal.

AREAS COVERED

A description of beneficial and detrimental effects of rt-PA treatment is addressed. An overview of new therapies against AIS, such as new thrombolytics, sonolysis and sonothrombolysis, endovascular procedures, and association therapies is provided. Updates on the pathophysiological process leading to intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is also discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

rt-PA treatment in AIS patients is beneficial to recovery outcomes. To weaken risks and improve benefits, it might be relevant to consider: i) a definitive identification of risk factors for symptomatic ICH; ii). a better organization of the health care system to reduce time-to-treatment and enhance discharge management. The pharmacological improvement of new thrombolytic drugs (such as tenecteplase and desmoteplase) targeting harmful and maximally exploiting beneficial effects might further reduce mortality and disability in AIS.

Repeated Intravenous Thrombolysis for Early Recurrent Stroke: Challenging the Exclusion Criterion

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) within 4.5 hours from symptom onset improves functional outcome in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Its use in patients with previous stroke within the preceding 3 months is contraindicated because of the assumed higher risk of intracranial hemorrhage. In addition, tissue-type plasminogen activator may itself promote neurotoxicity and blood-brain barrier disruption. However, safety and effectiveness of repeated IVT is essentially unknown in patients with early (<3 months) recurrent stroke (ERS), because they were excluded from thrombolysis trials. This article reports the largest case series of repeated IVT in ERS.

METHODS

We reviewed databases of prospectively collected patient data of 8 European stroke centers for the presence of patients with ERS, who received IVT for both the index stroke and ERS. Demographics, clinical and radiological data, bleeding complications, and functional outcome were analyzed.

RESULTS

We identified 19 subjects with repeated IVT in ERS. Mean age was 68±12 years, and 37% of them were female. Median interthrombolysis interval was 30 days (interquartile range, 13-50). Functional independence (modified Rankin scale score ≤2) was achieved in 79% of patients after the first and in 47.4% after repeated IV tissue-type plasminogen activator, respectively. There was no symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Median final infarct volume after the first IVT was 1.5 cm(3) (interquartile range, 0.5-3.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with small infarct volumes and robust clinical improvement might be considered for repeated IVT within 3 months. Studies following strict protocols and larger registries incorporating these patients might serve to identify selection criteria for the safe use of repeated IVT in ERS.

Scientific Rationale for the Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria for Intravenous Alteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke

Purpose—

To critically review and evaluate the science behind individual eligibility criteria (indication/inclusion and contraindications/exclusion criteria) for intravenous recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (alteplase) treatment in acute ischemic stroke. This will allow us to better inform stroke providers of quantitative and qualitative risks associated with alteplase administration under selected commonly and uncommonly encountered clinical circumstances and to identify future research priorities concerning these eligibility criteria, which could potentially expand the safe and judicious use of alteplase and improve outcomes after stroke.

Methods—

Writing group members were nominated by the committee chair on the basis of their previous work in relevant topic areas and were approved by the American Heart Association Stroke Council’s Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and the American Heart Association’s Manuscript Oversight Committee. The writers used systematic literature reviews, references to published clinical and epidemiology studies, morbidity and mortality reports, clinical and public health guidelines, authoritative statements, personal files, and expert opinion to summarize existing evidence and to indicate gaps in current knowledge and, when appropriate, formulated recommendations using standard American Heart Association criteria. All members of the writing group had the opportunity to comment on and approved the final version of this document. The document underwent extensive American Heart Association internal peer review, Stroke Council Leadership review, and Scientific Statements Oversight Committee review before consideration and approval by the American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee.

Results—

After a review of the current literature, it was clearly evident that the levels of evidence supporting individual exclusion criteria for intravenous alteplase vary widely. Several exclusionary criteria have already undergone extensive scientific study such as the clear benefit of alteplase treatment in elderly stroke patients, those with severe stroke, those with diabetes mellitus and hyperglycemia, and those with minor early ischemic changes evident on computed tomography. Some exclusions such as recent intracranial surgery are likely based on common sense and sound judgment and are unlikely to ever be subjected to a randomized, clinical trial to evaluate safety. Most other contraindications or warnings range somewhere in between. However, the differential impact of each exclusion criterion varies not only with the evidence base behind it but also with the frequency of the exclusion within the stroke population, the probability of coexistence of multiple exclusion factors in a single patient, and the variation in practice among treating clinicians.

Intravenous Thrombolysis for Stroke Recurring Within 3 Months From the Previous Event

Background and Purpose—

According to the European license, alteplase can be given no sooner than 3 months after previous stroke. However, it is not known whether past history of stroke influences the effect of treatment. Our aim was to evaluate safety and functional outcome after intravenous thrombolysis administered in everyday practice to patients with previous stroke ≤3 months compared with those with first-ever stroke.

Methods—

We analyzed consecutive cases treated with alteplase between October 2003 and July 2014 contributed to the Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis for Stroke–Eastern Europe registry from 12 countries. Odds ratios were calculated using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression.

Results—

Of 13 007 patients, 11 221 (86%) had no history of stroke and 249 (2%) experienced previous stroke ≤3 months before admission. Patients with previous stroke ≤3 months had a higher proportion of hypertension and hyperlipidemia. There were no significant differences in outcome, including symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage according to European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study (unadjusted odds ratio 1.27, 95% confidence interval: 0.74–2.15), and being alive and independent at 3 months (odds ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval: 0.61–1.09).

Conclusions—

Patients currently treated with alteplase, despite a history of previous stroke ≤3 months, do not seem to achieve worse outcome than those with first-ever stroke. Although careful patient selection was probably of major importance, our findings provide reassurance that this group of patients may safely benefit from thrombolysis and should not be arbitrarily excluded as a whole. Further studies are needed to identify the shortest safe time lapse from the previous event to treatment with alteplase.

Repeated thrombolytic therapy in patients with recurrent acute ischemic stroke

Background and Purpose

Widespread use of thrombolytic treatments, along with improved chances of survival after an initial ischemic stroke, increases the possibility of repeated thrombolysis. There are few reports, however, regarding repeated thrombolysis in patients who have suffered acute ischemic stroke. We explored the number and outcome of patients with repeated thrombolytic therapy in the era of multimodal thrombolytic treatments.

Methods

We investigated patients with acute ischemic stroke who had received thrombolytic treatments for a period of 10 years. Number of thrombolysis was determined in each patient. Recanalization was defined as Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction grading ≥2a. Symptomatic hemorrhagic transformation was defined as any increase in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score that could be attributed to intracerebral hemorrhage. A good outcome was defined as a modified Rankin scale score ≤2.

Results

Of the 437 patients who received thrombolytic treatments, only 7 underwent repeated thrombolysis (1.6%). The median age at the time of repeated thrombolytic therapy was 71 years old; 4 of the patients were female. All patients had 1 or more potential sources of cardiac embolism. Recanalization was achieved in all patients, in both the first and the second thrombolysis. No symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage occurred after repeated thrombolytic treatments. Five patients (71.4%) showed good outcomes at 3 months.

Conclusions

Repeated thrombolysis for recurrent acute ischemic stroke appears to be safe and feasible. Among patients who experience recurrent acute ischemic stroke, thrombolytic therapy could be considered even if the patient has had previous thrombolytic treatments.

Thrombolysis Despite Recent Stroke

Background and Purpose—

Thrombolysis in ischemic stroke is contraindicated in patients who have had a stroke within 3 months. However, it is unclear whether thrombolytic therapy is associated with adverse outcomes in this population. We report the characteristics and outcomes of patients treated with systemic recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator in the context of known or unknown recent stroke.

Methods—

We identified patients who received recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator despite recent stroke (within 3 months of acute thrombolysis). Clinical and radiological findings were collected, including early neurological worsening and hemorrhagic transformation on unenhanced computed tomography at 24 hours. Clinical outcome measured by modified Rankin Scale was determined at 3 months from onset.

Results—

Six patients presenting with acute stroke within 3 months of previous stroke were identified (median age, 76 years; median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, 8.5). Hemorrhagic transformation was seen in the follow-up computed tomography scan in 3 of 6 cases: all were hemorrhagic transformation 1 (petechial hemorrhage), asymptomatic, and mostly located within the area of subacute infarction. There was no early neurological deterioration, and 3 patients had modified Rankin Scale ≤2 after 3 months.

Conclusions—

In our center, we thrombolysed 6 patients despite recent stroke. Three patients had asymptomatic petechial hemorrhagic transformation within the area of subacute infarct, without apparent neurological worsening. Prospective studies are needed to explore the possible safety of tissue-type plasminogen activator in the context of previous subacute stroke in otherwise eligible patients.