Safety and Efficacy of Ultrasound-Enhanced Thrombolysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Ultrasound-enhanced thrombolysis is a promising new approach to facilitate reperfusion therapies for acute ischemic stroke. So far, 3 different ultrasound technologies were used to increase the thrombolytic activity of tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), including transcranial Doppler (TCD), transcranial color-coded duplex (TCCD), and low-frequency ultrasound. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-enhanced thrombolysis compared to the current standard of care (intravenous tPA). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Through Medline, Embase, and Cochrane database search, we identified and abstracted all studies of ultrasound-enhanced thrombolysis in acute cerebral ischemia. Principal investigators were contacted if data not available through peer-reviewed publication were needed. Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) and recanalization rates were compared between tPA, tPA+TCD+/-microspheres (microS), tPA+TCCD+/-microS, and tPA+low-frequency ultrasound. RESULTS: A total of 6 randomized (n=224) and 3 nonrandomized (n=192) studies were identified. The rates of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage in randomized studies were as follows: tPA+TCD, 3.8% (95% CI, 0%-11.2%); tPA+TCCD, 11.1% (95% CI, 0%-28.9%); tPA+low-frequency ultrasound, 35.7% (95% CI, 16.2%- 61.4%); and tPA alone, 2.9% (95% CI, 0%-8.4%). Complete recanalization rates were higher in patients receiving combination of TCD with tPA 37.2% (95% CI, 26.5%- 47.9%) compared with patients treated with tPA alone 17.2% (95% CI, 9.5%-24.9%). In 8 trials of high-frequency (TCD/TCCD) ultrasound-enhanced thrombolysis, tPA+TCD/TCCD+/-microS was associated with a higher likelihood of complete recanalization (pooled OR, 2.99; 95% CI, 1.70-5.25; P=0.0001) when compared to tPA alone. High-frequency ultrasound-enhanced thrombolysis was not associated with an increased risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (pooled OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.44-3.60; P=0.67). CONCLUSIONS: The present safety and signal-of-efficacy data of high-frequency ultrasound-enhanced thrombolysis should be taken into account in the design of future randomized controlled trials.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".