The Added Benefit of Intra‐Arterial Thrombolysis After Successful Recanalization by Endovascular Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized‐Controlled Clinical Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite successful recanalization following endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) with large-vessel occlusion (LVO), many patients fail to achieve excellent functional outcomes. Post-EVT intra-arterial thrombolysis (IAT) has emerged as a potential adjunctive strategy to improve microvascular reperfusion and clinical recovery. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing IAT plus best medical therapy (BMT) versus BMT alone in LVO-AIS patients with successful recanalization post-EVT. The primary efficacy outcome was 3-month excellent functional outcome [modified Rankin Scale (mRS)-score: 0-1]. Secondary efficacy outcomes included good functional outcome (mRS-score: 0-2) and reduced disability (mRS-score shift analysis) at 3 months. The primary safety outcome was symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH); secondary safety outcomes included any-ICH and 3-month all-cause mortality. Subgroup and network meta-analyses were performed evaluating the effects of different thrombolytic agents. RESULTS: = 0%) compared with BMT alone. Similar rates of 3-month good functional outcome, 3-month mortality, sICH and any-ICH were observed. Although no significant subgroup differences emerged, in the network meta-analysis alteplase ranked highest in efficacy [surface under the cumulative rank curve (SUCRA): 90%], followed by tenecteplase (61%) and urokinase (40%) in achieving 3-month excellent functional outcome. CONCLUSIONS: IAT improves excellent functional outcomes without compromising safety in LVO-AIS patients with successful recanalization after EVT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The prespecified protocol of the present systematic review and meta-analysis has been registered in the International Prospective Register of Ongoing Systematic Reviews PROSPERO (registration ID: CRD420251035903).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.049 | 0.017 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".