SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2026
Alteplase versus tenecteplase in acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntravenous thrombolysis remains a cornerstone in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) management, particularly in large vessel occlusion (LVO). While alteplase has long been the standard thrombolytic agent, tenecteplase has emerged as a promising alternative due to its pharmacokinetic advantages. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare the efficacy and safety of tenecteplase versus alteplase in AIS patients with LVO.
methodsA systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase until February 2025. Studies comparing tenecteplase and alteplase in AIS patients with LVO were included. The primary outcomes were functional independence at 3 months (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0-1 and 0-2), mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Secondary outcomes included any bleeding, adverse events, and overall complications. Pooled estimates were calculated using risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
resultsA total of 14 studies (N = 9641 patients) were included, comprising 5898 patients receiving alteplase and 3743 receiving tenecteplase. No significant differences were observed in 3-month functional outcomes: mRS 0-1 (RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.1, P = 0.38) and mRS 0-2 (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.08, P = 0.44). Mortality rates were comparable between groups (OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.88-1.30). No significant differences were found in intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) (OR = 1.25, 95% CI: 0.96-1.62), sICH (OR = 1.1, 95% CI: 0.91-1.33), or any bleeding (OR = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.9-1.57). The pooled OR for adverse events was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.53 to 1.17), indicating a comparable safety profile.
conclusionThis meta-analysis supports the non-inferiority of tenecteplase compared to alteplase in LVO-associated AIS regarding efficacy and safety. While tenecteplase offers practical advantages, including single-bolus administration and potentially lower costs, further large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings and optimize thrombolytic selection in stroke care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41546719What 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.