Safety and Efficacy of Tenecteplase Compared With Alteplase in Patients With Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: It is unknown whether intravenous thrombolysis using tenecteplase is noninferior or preferable compared with alteplase for patients with acute ischemic stroke. Objective: To examine the safety and efficacy of tenecteplase compared to alteplase among patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a prespecified analysis of the Intravenous Tenecteplase Compared With Alteplase for Acute Ischaemic Stroke in Canada (ACT) randomized clinical trial that enrolled patients from 22 primary and comprehensive stroke centers across Canada between December 10, 2019, and January 25, 2022. Patients 18 years and older with a disabling ischemic stroke within 4.5 hours of symptom onset were randomly assigned (1:1) to either intravenous tenecteplase or alteplase and were monitored for up to 120 days. Patients with baseline intracranial internal carotid artery (ICA), M1-middle cerebral artery (MCA), M2-MCA, and basilar occlusions were included in this analysis. A total of 1600 patients were enrolled, and 23 withdrew consent. Exposures: Intravenous tenecteplase (0.25 mg/kg) vs intravenous alteplase (0.9 mg/kg). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of modified Rankin scale (mRS) score 0-1 at 90 days. Secondary outcomes were an mRS score from 0 to 2, mortality, and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage. Angiographic outcomes were successful reperfusion (extended Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction scale score 2b-3) on first and final angiographic acquisitions. Multivariable analyses (adjusting for age, sex, National Institute of Health Stroke Scale score, onset-to-needle time, and occlusion location) were carried out. Results: Among 1577 patients, 520 (33.0%) had LVO (median [IQR] age, 74 [64-83] years; 283 [54.4%] women): 135 (26.0%) with ICA occlusion, 237 (45.6%) with M1-MCA, 117 (22.5%) with M2-MCA, and 31 (6.0%) with basilar occlusions. The primary outcome (mRS score 0-1) was achieved in 86 participants (32.7%) in the tenecteplase group vs 76 (29.6%) in the alteplase group. Rates of mRS 0-2 (129 [49.0%] vs 131 [51.0%]), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (16 [6.1%] vs 11 [4.3%]), and mortality (19.9% vs 18.1%) were similar in the tenecteplase and alteplase groups, respectively. No difference was noted in successful reperfusion rates in the first (19 [9.2%] vs 21 [10.5%]) and final angiogram (174 [84.5%] vs 177 [88.9%]) among 405 patients who underwent thrombectomy. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings in this study indicate that intravenous tenecteplase conferred similar reperfusion, safety, and functional outcomes compared to alteplase among patients with LVO.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».