Systemic THrombolysis Randomization IN Endovascular Stroke Therapy (SHRINE) Collaboration: a patient-level pooled analysis of the SKIP and DEVT Trials

Endovascular thrombectomy with or without intravenous alteplase in large-core ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The role of bridging intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with alteplase before endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in treating large core ischemic stroke remains uncertain. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes and safety of EVT with or without bridging IVT in patients with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion (ACLVO) and baseline Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) ≤ 5. We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase from inception until November 2023. The primary outcome was 90-day functional independence (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0-2). Secondary outcomes included 90-day independent ambulation (mRS 0-3), successful recanalization, any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH (sICH) and 90-day mortality. A random-effects model was used for data pooling. Five high-quality studies, incorporating 2124 patients (41% treated with bridging IVT), were included. Across both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, no significant differences were found between the bridging IVT and EVT-alone groups in terms of functional independence (odds ratios [OR] = 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90-2.07, P = 0.14; adjusted OR [aOR] = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.68-2.09, P = 0.53) or independent ambulation (OR = 1.14, 95% CI: 0.80-1.62, P = 0.47; aOR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.00-1.39, P = 0.05) at 90 days. Furthermore, no differences were observed in successful recanalization, any ICH, sICH, and 90-day mortality between the two treatment groups. Bridging IVT exhibits similar functional and safety outcomes compared to EVT alone in ACLVO patients with baseline ASPECTS ≤ 5. Further research is warranted to confirm these findings.

The role of intravenous thrombolysis before mechanical Thrombectomy: A subgroup analysis of the RESILIENT trial

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials have recently evaluated the non-inferiority of direct thrombectomy versus intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) followed by endovascular therapy in anterior circulation large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke in patients eligible for IVT within 4.5 h from stroke onset with controversial results. We aimed to assess the effect of IVT on the clinical outcome of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in the RESILIENT trial.

METHODS

RESILIENT was a randomized, prospective, multicenter, controlled trial assessing the safety and efficacy of thrombectomy versus medical treatment alone. A total of 221 patients were enrolled. The trial showed a substantial benefit of MT when added to medical management. All eligible patients received intravenous tPA within the 4.5-h-window. Ordinal logistic and binary regression analyses using intravenous tPA as an interaction term were performed with adjustments for potential confounders, including age, baseline NIHSS score, occlusion site, and ASPECTS. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Among 221 randomized patients (median NIHSS, 18 IQR [14-21]), 155 (70%) were treated with IVT. There was no difference in the mRS ordinal shift and frequency of functional independence between patients who received or not IV tPA; the odds ratio for the ordinal mRS shift was 2.63 [1.48-4.69] for the IVT group and 1.54 [0.63-3.74] for the no IVT group, with a p-value of 0.42. IVT also did not affect the frequency of good recanalization (TICI 2b or higher) and hemorrhagic transformation.

CONCLUSIONS

The large effect size of MT on LVO outcomes was not significantly affected by IVT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

RESILIENT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02216643.