Tenecteplase versus Alteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IF 1.8 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Alok Singh, Madhusudan Prasad Singh, Nitin R. Gaikwad, and Pankaj Kumar Kannauje
{"title":"Tenecteplase versus Alteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis","authors":"Alok Singh, Madhusudan Prasad Singh, Nitin R. Gaikwad, and Pankaj Kumar Kannauje","doi":"10.1177/09727531231193242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background A number of clinical trials have compared tenecteplase (TNK) and alteplase for the management of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and the results are inconsistent. Purpose Present systematic review and meta-analysis is undertaken to analyse the efficacy and safety of TNK in AIS compared to alteplase. Summary A thorough literature search was performed through the databases Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and clinicaltrials.gov, for a period from inception to September 2022, with the keywords i.e., “tenecteplase” and “alteplase” and “acute ischemic stroke.” Clinical trials published in English that compared the efficacy and safety of TNK to alteplase in AIS were included. The major outcomes of this meta-analysis were proportion of patients free from disability and functional independence at 90 days, early neurological improvement at 24 hours, all-cause mortality at 90 days, patients with intra cranial hemorrhage (ICH), and patients with severe disability at 90 days. A total of nine studies with 3,573 patients were included in the analysis. The proportion of patients with freedom from disability was comparable in both groups (relative risk [RR] = 1.04, 95 per cent CI = 0.92–1.17; p = .53). Similarly, proportion of patients with functional independence was comparable (RR = 1.12, 95 per cent CI = 0.96–1.31; p = .14). TNK group had a higher rate of early neurological recovery (RR = 1.56, 95 per cent CI = 0.96–2.54; p = .07). All-cause mortality at 90 days was comparable in both groups (RR = 0.97; 95 per cent CI = 0.72–1.29; p = .82). The proportion of patients with ICH was higher in TNK group (RR = 1.14, 95 per cent CI = 0.77–1.68; p = .52). The proportion of patients with severe disability was less in TNK group (RR =0.84, 95 per cent CI = 0.53–1.32; p = .44). Key Message TNK was similar to alteplase in terms of efficacy and safety. The patients in TNK group showed early neurological improvement but were simultaneously at higher risk of ICH. The TNK can be an alternative to alteplase if the benefits outweigh the risks.","PeriodicalId":7921,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Neurosciences","volume":"10 24","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Neurosciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09727531231193242","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background A number of clinical trials have compared tenecteplase (TNK) and alteplase for the management of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and the results are inconsistent. Purpose Present systematic review and meta-analysis is undertaken to analyse the efficacy and safety of TNK in AIS compared to alteplase. Summary A thorough literature search was performed through the databases Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and clinicaltrials.gov, for a period from inception to September 2022, with the keywords i.e., “tenecteplase” and “alteplase” and “acute ischemic stroke.” Clinical trials published in English that compared the efficacy and safety of TNK to alteplase in AIS were included. The major outcomes of this meta-analysis were proportion of patients free from disability and functional independence at 90 days, early neurological improvement at 24 hours, all-cause mortality at 90 days, patients with intra cranial hemorrhage (ICH), and patients with severe disability at 90 days. A total of nine studies with 3,573 patients were included in the analysis. The proportion of patients with freedom from disability was comparable in both groups (relative risk [RR] = 1.04, 95 per cent CI = 0.92–1.17; p = .53). Similarly, proportion of patients with functional independence was comparable (RR = 1.12, 95 per cent CI = 0.96–1.31; p = .14). TNK group had a higher rate of early neurological recovery (RR = 1.56, 95 per cent CI = 0.96–2.54; p = .07). All-cause mortality at 90 days was comparable in both groups (RR = 0.97; 95 per cent CI = 0.72–1.29; p = .82). The proportion of patients with ICH was higher in TNK group (RR = 1.14, 95 per cent CI = 0.77–1.68; p = .52). The proportion of patients with severe disability was less in TNK group (RR =0.84, 95 per cent CI = 0.53–1.32; p = .44). Key Message TNK was similar to alteplase in terms of efficacy and safety. The patients in TNK group showed early neurological improvement but were simultaneously at higher risk of ICH. The TNK can be an alternative to alteplase if the benefits outweigh the risks.
替奈普酶与阿替普酶治疗急性缺血性卒中:系统回顾和荟萃分析
许多临床试验比较了替奈普酶(TNK)和阿替普酶治疗急性缺血性卒中(AIS)的疗效,结果不一致。目的:通过系统回顾和荟萃分析,分析TNK与阿替普酶治疗AIS的疗效和安全性。通过Embase、Cochrane Library、PubMed和clinicaltrials.gov数据库进行了全面的文献检索,检索时间从成立到2022年9月,关键词为“tenecteplase”、“alteplase”和“急性缺血性卒中”。英文发表的临床试验比较了TNK和阿替普酶在AIS中的疗效和安全性。该荟萃分析的主要结果是90天无残疾和功能独立患者的比例、24小时早期神经系统改善、90天全因死亡率、90天颅内出血(ICH)患者和严重残疾患者。共有9项研究,共3573名患者被纳入分析。两组患者无残疾的比例具有可比性(相对危险度[RR] = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.92-1.17;P = .53)。同样,功能独立患者的比例也具有可比性(RR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.96-1.31;P = .14)。TNK组早期神经系统恢复率较高(RR = 1.56, 95% CI = 0.96-2.54;P = .07)。两组90天全因死亡率具有可比性(RR = 0.97;95% CI = 0.72-1.29;P = .82)。TNK组脑出血患者比例较高(RR = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.77-1.68;P = .52)。TNK组重度残疾患者比例较低(RR =0.84, 95% CI = 0.53-1.32;P = .44)。TNK在疗效和安全性方面与阿替普酶相似。TNK组患者早期神经功能改善,但同时脑出血风险较高。如果益处大于风险,TNK可以作为阿替普酶的替代品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of Neurosciences
Annals of Neurosciences NEUROSCIENCES-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信