ArticleEuropean journal of neurology2024
Impact of bridging thrombolysis versus endovascular thrombectomy alone on outcomes in anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation and acute ischaemic stroke.
Article in European journal of neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of bridging thrombolysis versus endovascular thrombectomy alone on outcomes in anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation and acute ischaemic stroke.European journal of neurology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeThe impact of bridging thrombolysis prior to endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) compared to EVT alone on intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH), subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH), and death in anticoagulated atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) is not well defined.
methodsA retrospective study was conducted using data from a federated research network (TriNetX) including 114 health care organisations in the United States. Anticoagulated AF patients with AIS who received either bridging thrombolysis (BT) or EVT alone from September 2018 to November 2023 were included. Following propensity score matching, Cox regression analyses examined the risk of ICH, SAH, and death within 30 and 90 days, comparing anticoagulated AF patients receiving BT versus EVT only.
resultsA total of 3156 patients with AIS were treated with BT or EVT alone. Following 1:1 propensity score matching, the cohort included 766 patients in each group. ICH occurred within 30 and 90 days in 6.9% and 8.0% in the BT group compared with 7.4% and 7.7% in the EVT-only group (hazard ratios [HR] = 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.63-1.33 and HR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.71-1.45, respectively). SAH occurred within 30 and 90 days in 4.2% and 4.4% of patients in the BT compared to 3.0% and 3.4% in the EVT-only group (HR = 1.38, 95% CI = 0.81-2.38 and HR = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.77-2.14, respectively). Death occurred within 30 and 90 days in 17.8% and 19.8% of patients in the BT compared to 22.2% and 27.3% in the EVT-only group (HR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.62-0.97 and HR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.56-0.86, respectively).
conclusionsIn anticoagulated AF patients with AIS, BT was associated with a significantly lower risk of death, with no difference in ICH or SAH risk within 30 and 90 days compared to EVT only.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.