Deans' stroke musings: Bridging Thrombolysis Achieved Better Outcomes Than Direct Thrombectomy After Large Vessel Occlusion

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Thursday, December 17, 2020

Bridging Thrombolysis Achieved Better Outcomes Than Direct Thrombectomy After Large Vessel Occlusion

BETTER IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH!

When you are the 1 in 4 per WHO that has a stroke will you be satisfied with this 'better' crapola and not getting recovered?

Bridging Thrombolysis Achieved Better Outcomes Than Direct Thrombectomy After Large Vessel Occlusion

An Updated Meta-Analysis

Originally published11 Dec 2020https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.031477Stroke. ;0

Abstract

The utility and necessity of pretreatment with intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) before mechanical thrombectomy (MT) remains an issue of strong debate. This study aims to compare the outcomes of bridging thrombolysis (BT, IVT+MT) with direct MT (d-MT) after large vessel ischemic stroke based on the most up-to-date evidence. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library from January 2017 to June 2020 were searched for studies that directly compared the outcomes of the 2 strategies. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. Combined estimates of odds ratios (ORs) of BT versus d-MT were derived. Multiple subgroup analyses were performed, especially for IVT-eligible patients. Thirty studies involving 7191 patients in the BT group and 4891 patients in the d-MT group were included. Methodological quality was generally high. Compared with patients in the d-MT group, patients in the BT group showed significantly better functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score 0–2) at 90 days (OR=1.43 [95% CI, 1.28–1.61]), had lower mortality at 90 days (OR=0.67 [95% CI, 0.60–0.75]), and achieved higher successful recanalization (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Ischemia score 2b-3) rate (OR=1.23 [95% CI, 1.07–1.42]). No significant difference was detected in the occurrence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage between 2 groups (OR=1.01 [95% CI, 0.86–1.19]). Subgroup analysis showed that functional independence frequency remained significantly higher in BT group regardless of IVT eligibility or study design. Compared with d-MT, bridging with IVT led to better clinical outcomes, lower mortality at 90 days, and higher successful recanalization rates, without increasing the risk of near-term hemorrhagic complications. The benefits of BT based on this most recent literature evidence support the current guidelines of using BT.