Advances in the management of acute ischemic stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to summarize the therapeutic advances and evidence in the medical management of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Recent evidence comparing the efficacy and safety of tenecteplase (TNK) with alteplase for intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in AIS will be highlighted. Recent advances and evidence on improving micro-circulation following endovascular procedures and neuroprotection will be reviewed. RECENT FINDINGS: A significant number of randomized control studies now support the use of tenecteplase for IVT in AIS. TNK 0.25 mg/kg single bolus is as effective and well tolerated as alteplase 0.9 mg/kg infusion for IVT in AIS. Evidence from randomized control trials (RCTs) has shown effective and well tolerated expansion of the therapeutic window of IVT in the wake-up stroke and up to 9 h after last seen well, using advanced neuroimaging with computed tomography perfusion/MRI. Early evidence suggests that intra-arterial alteplase may help improve microcirculation in patients with large vessel occlusion following successful thrombectomy. However, more trials are required to confirm the results. Similarly, early evidence from a recent RCT showed that remote ischemic conditioning confers potential neuroprotection and improves outcomes in AIS. SUMMARY: Converging evidence has demonstrated that for patients with ischemic stroke presenting at under 4.5 h from the onset, TNK is comparable to alteplase. These data along with the practical advantages of TNK have resulted in a shift to replace intravenous TNK as the standard for thrombolysis. Ongoing studies of IVT with TNK are focussed on defining the optimal dose, expanding the time window with multimodal imaging and defining the role of thrombolysis for bridging patients with stroke due to large vessel occlusion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".