MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889573684 · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.118.022128

Intravenous tPA (Tissue-Type Plasminogen Activator) in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Taking Non–Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants Preceding Stroke

2018· review· en· W2889573684 on OpenAlexaff
Chen Jin, Ryan J. Huang, Eric D. Peterson, Daniel T. Laskowitz, Adrian F. Hernandez, Jerome J. Federspiel, Lee H. Schwamm, Deepak L. Bhatt, Eric E. Smith, Gregg C. Fonarow, Ying Xian

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersDaiichi Sankyo EuropeJanssen PharmaceuticalsNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeGenentechRegeneron PharmaceuticalsNational Institutes of HealthBelvoir Media GroupMedicines CompanyRegado BiosciencesAstraZenecaAmarin CorporationIronwood Pharmaceuticals, IncorporatedSt. Jude MedicalDuke Clinical Research InstituteEisaiBoston VA Research InstituteBoston Scientific CorporationIdorsia PharmaceuticalsBristol-Myers SquibbCleveland ClinicMassachusetts General HospitalEli Lilly and CompanyAmgenPfizerPatient-Centered Outcomes Research InstituteSanofiAmerican Heart Association
KeywordsMedicineDabigatranModified Rankin ScaleRivaroxabanVitamin K antagonistInterquartile rangeStroke (engine)WarfarinApixabanIntracerebral hemorrhageDirect thrombin inhibitorAnesthesiaTissue plasminogen activatorInternal medicineIdarucizumabFibrinolytic agentOdds ratioAtrial fibrillationIschemic strokeIschemiaGlasgow Coma Scale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Purpose- Although there are no trials or large cohorts to inform clinical care, current guidelines caution against giving intravenous tPA (tissue-type plasminogen activator) to patients with acute ischemic stroke who are taking non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs). We performed a literature review of intravenous tPA in patients treated with NOACs preceding stroke. Methods- A literature search of PubMed was performed encompassing January 2010 to March 2018. Patient characteristics, timing of last medication intake, laboratory testing, use of reversal, and outcomes ≤3 months after discharge were summarized. Results- We identified 55 studies with 492 NOAC patients receiving tPA (dabigatran, 181; rivaroxaban, 215; apixaban, 40; and unspecified NOAC, 56). Among patients with complete data, the median time from the last NOAC intake to symptom onset was 8 hours (interquartile range, 2.5-14.5), with 55.2% (80/145) within 12 hours. Few patients underwent sensitive laboratory tests, such as thrombin time, diluted thrombin time, or anti-Xa assays before tPA administration. The overall observed rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, mortality, and favorable outcomes (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, ≤1; modified Rankin Scale score, 0-2; or neurological improvement in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, ≥8 points) were 4.3% (20/462), 11.3% (48/423), and 43.7% (164/375), respectively. Among dabigatran-treated patients, reversal with idarucizumab was associated with fewer symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (4.5% [2/44] versus 7.4% [8/108]; unadjusted odds ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.12-2.92), death (4.5% [2/44] versus 12.0% [13/108]; unadjusted odds ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.08-1.61), and more favorable outcomes (79.1% [34/43] versus 39.2% [29/74]; unadjusted odds ratio, 5.86; 95% CI, 2.45-14.00), although the differences were not statistically significant for symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and death. Conclusions- These preliminary observations suggest that tPA may be reasonably well tolerated without prohibitive risks of bleeding complications in selected patients on NOACs. Reversal of anticoagulant effects by idarucizumab for dabigatran-treated patients before tPA is an emerging strategy that was associated with more favorable outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207