Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://swslhd.intersearch.com.au/swslhdjspui/handle/1/8673
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorYogendrakumar, V.-
dc.contributor.authorBeharry, J.-
dc.contributor.authorChurilov, L.-
dc.contributor.authorAlidin, K.-
dc.contributor.authorUgalde, M.-
dc.contributor.authorPesavento, L.-
dc.contributor.authorWeir, L.-
dc.contributor.authorMitchell, P. J.-
dc.contributor.authorKleinig, T. J.-
dc.contributor.authorYassi, N.-
dc.contributor.authorThijs, V.-
dc.contributor.authorWu, T. Y.-
dc.contributor.authorShah, D. G.-
dc.contributor.authorDewey, H. M.-
dc.contributor.authorWijeratne, T.-
dc.contributor.authorYan, B.-
dc.contributor.authorDesmond, P. M.-
dc.contributor.authorSharma, G.-
dc.contributor.authorParsons, M. W.-
dc.contributor.authorDonnan, G. A.-
dc.contributor.authorDavis, S. M.-
dc.contributor.authorCampbell, B. C. V.-
dc.contributor.authorfor the Royal Melbourne Stroke, R.-
dc.contributor.authorCollaborators, E.-I. T.-
dc.date.accessioned2023-04-26T23:40:40Z-
dc.date.available2023-04-26T23:40:40Z-
dc.date.issued2023-
dc.identifier.urihttps://swslhd.intersearch.com.au/swslhdjspui/handle/1/8673-
dc.description.abstractObjective: Tenecteplase improves reperfusion compared to alteplase in patients with large vessel occlusions. To determine whether this improvement varies across the spectrum of thrombolytic agent to reperfusion assessment times, we performed a comparative analysis of tenecteplase and alteplase reperfusion rates. Methods: Patients with large vessel occlusion and treatment with thrombolysis were pooled from the Melbourne Stroke Registry, and the EXTEND-IA and EXTEND-IA TNK trials. The primary outcome, thrombolytic-induced reperfusion, was defined as the absence of retrievable thrombus or >50% reperfusion at imaging reassessment. We compared the treatment effect of tenecteplase and alteplase, accounting for thrombolytic to assessment exposure times, via Poisson modeling. We compared 90-day outcomes of patients who achieved reperfusion with a thrombolytic to patients who achieved reperfusion via endovascular therapy using ordinal logistic regression. Results: Among 893 patients included in the primary analysis, thrombolytic-induced reperfusion was observed in 184 (21%) patients. Tenecteplase was associated with higher rates of reperfusion (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] = 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.09-2.07, p = 0.01). Findings were consistent in patient subgroups with first segment (aIRR = 1.41, 95% CI = 0.93-2.14) and second segment (aIRR = 2.07, 95% CI = 0.98-4.37) middle cerebral artery occlusions. Increased thrombolytic to reperfusion assessment times were associated with reperfusion (tenecteplase: adjusted risk ratio [aRR] = 1.08 per 15 minutes, 95% CI = 1.04-1.13 vs alteplase: aRR = 1.06 per 15 minutes, 95% CI = 1.00-1.13). No significant treatment-by-time interaction was observed (p = 0.87). Reperfusion via thrombolysis was associated with improved 90-day modified Rankin Scale scores (adjusted common odds ratio = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.54-3.01) compared to patients who achieved reperfusion following endovascular therapy. Interpretation: Tenecteplase, compared to alteplase, increases prethrombectomy reperfusion, regardless of the time from administration to reperfusion assessment. Prethrombectomy reperfusion is associated with better clinical outcomes. ANN NEUROL 2023;93:489-499. © 2022 The Authors. Annals of Neurology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Neurological Association.-
dc.titleTenecteplase Improves Reperfusion across Time in Large Vessel Stroke-
dc.typeJournal Article-
dc.contributor.swslhdauthorParsons, Mark. W.-
dc.description.affiliatesDepartment of Medicine and Neurology, Melbourne Brain Centre at the Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia Department of Medicine, Austin Health, University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia Department of Radiology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia Department of Neurology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA, Australia Population Health and Immunity Division, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Parkville, VIC, Australia Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia Department of Neurology, Christchurch Hospital, Christchurch, New Zealand Department of Neurology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia Eastern Health and Eastern Health Clinical School, Department of Neurosciences, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia Melbourne Medical School, Department of Medicine and Neurology, University of Melbourne and Western Health, Sunshine Hospital, St Albans, VIC, Australia Department of Neurology, Liverpool Hospital, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia-
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/ana.26547-
dc.identifier.departmentLiverpool Hospital, Department of Neurology-
dc.type.studyortrialArticle-
dc.identifier.journaltitleAnnals of Neurology-
Appears in Collections:Liverpool Hospital

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in Prosentient are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Who's citing