Emergency Department Workflow Times of Intravenous Thrombolysis with Tenecteplase versus Alteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Prospective Cohort Study before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

IF 2 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Cerebrovascular Diseases Extra Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-03 DOI:10.1159/000543900
Matias Guzman, Pablo M Lavados, Gabriel Cavada, Alejandro M Brunser, Veronica V Olavarria
{"title":"Emergency Department Workflow Times of Intravenous Thrombolysis with Tenecteplase versus Alteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Prospective Cohort Study before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.","authors":"Matias Guzman, Pablo M Lavados, Gabriel Cavada, Alejandro M Brunser, Veronica V Olavarria","doi":"10.1159/000543900","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Tenecteplase (TNK) has demonstrated to be non-inferior to alteplase (ALT) for intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). There are potential workflow benefits associated with TNK use, aiming to reduce patient length of stay in the emergency department. Our aim was to investigate whether the routine use of TNK during the COVID-19 pandemic influenced workflow times compared to historical use of ALT, while maintaining non-inferior clinical outcomes in a non-drip and ship scenario of a comprehensive stroke center.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included patients with AIS admitted from September 2019 to September 2022 and compared those treated with TNK during the COVID-19 pandemic to those treated with ALT in the period immediately before. We compared emergency department length of stay (EDLOS), door-to-needle time (DTN), door-to-groin puncture time (DTG), clinical and safety outcomes with adjusted general linear regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>110 patients treated with TNK and 111 with ALT were included in this study. Mean EDLOS was 251 (SD = 164) min for TNK users versus 240 (SD = 148) min for ALT (p = 0.62). Mean DTN was 43 (SD = 25) min for TNK versus 46 (SD = 27) min for ALT users (p = 0.39). Mean DTN under 60 min was achieved in 86 (78.2%) patients and in 85 (76.5%) patients of the TNK and ALT groups, respectively (p = 1.0). DTN under 45 min was achieved in 65.4% and 58.6% (p = 0.65) of the TNK and ALT groups, respectively. DTG time was 114 (SD = 43) min for TNK versus 111 (58 = SD) min in the ALT group (p = 0.88). DTG under 90 min was achieved in 32% of the TNK group and 35% of the ALT group (p = 0.69). There were no differences in any of the clinical or safety outcomes between groups at 90 days.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The adoption of TNK during COVID-19 pandemic did not result in a change in EDLOS, DTN, or DTG times when compared to ALT in this cohort. Safety and clinical outcomes were similar between groups. Probably a greater benefit could have been seen in a drip and ship thrombolysis setting. Further research is needed to assess the potential advantages of TNK in drip and ship scenarios of IVT.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Tenecteplase (TNK) has demonstrated to be non-inferior to alteplase (ALT) for intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). There are potential workflow benefits associated with TNK use, aiming to reduce patient length of stay in the emergency department. Our aim was to investigate whether the routine use of TNK during the COVID-19 pandemic influenced workflow times compared to historical use of ALT, while maintaining non-inferior clinical outcomes in a non-drip and ship scenario of a comprehensive stroke center.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included patients with AIS admitted from September 2019 to September 2022 and compared those treated with TNK during the COVID-19 pandemic to those treated with ALT in the period immediately before. We compared emergency department length of stay (EDLOS), door-to-needle time (DTN), door-to-groin puncture time (DTG), clinical and safety outcomes with adjusted general linear regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>110 patients treated with TNK and 111 with ALT were included in this study. Mean EDLOS was 251 (SD = 164) min for TNK users versus 240 (SD = 148) min for ALT (p = 0.62). Mean DTN was 43 (SD = 25) min for TNK versus 46 (SD = 27) min for ALT users (p = 0.39). Mean DTN under 60 min was achieved in 86 (78.2%) patients and in 85 (76.5%) patients of the TNK and ALT groups, respectively (p = 1.0). DTN under 45 min was achieved in 65.4% and 58.6% (p = 0.65) of the TNK and ALT groups, respectively. DTG time was 114 (SD = 43) min for TNK versus 111 (58 = SD) min in the ALT group (p = 0.88). DTG under 90 min was achieved in 32% of the TNK group and 35% of the ALT group (p = 0.69). There were no differences in any of the clinical or safety outcomes between groups at 90 days.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The adoption of TNK during COVID-19 pandemic did not result in a change in EDLOS, DTN, or DTG times when compared to ALT in this cohort. Safety and clinical outcomes were similar between groups. Probably a greater benefit could have been seen in a drip and ship thrombolysis setting. Further research is needed to assess the potential advantages of TNK in drip and ship scenarios of IVT.</p>","PeriodicalId":45709,"journal":{"name":"Cerebrovascular Diseases Extra","volume":" ","pages":"102-109"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11882161/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cerebrovascular Diseases Extra","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000543900","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Tenecteplase (TNK) has demonstrated to be non-inferior to alteplase (ALT) for intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). There are potential workflow benefits associated with TNK use, aiming to reduce patient length of stay in the emergency department. Our aim was to investigate whether the routine use of TNK during the COVID-19 pandemic influenced workflow times compared to historical use of ALT, while maintaining non-inferior clinical outcomes in a non-drip and ship scenario of a comprehensive stroke center.

Methods: We included patients with AIS admitted from September 2019 to September 2022 and compared those treated with TNK during the COVID-19 pandemic to those treated with ALT in the period immediately before. We compared emergency department length of stay (EDLOS), door-to-needle time (DTN), door-to-groin puncture time (DTG), clinical and safety outcomes with adjusted general linear regression models.

Results: 110 patients treated with TNK and 111 with ALT were included in this study. Mean EDLOS was 251 (SD = 164) min for TNK users versus 240 (SD = 148) min for ALT (p = 0.62). Mean DTN was 43 (SD = 25) min for TNK versus 46 (SD = 27) min for ALT users (p = 0.39). Mean DTN under 60 min was achieved in 86 (78.2%) patients and in 85 (76.5%) patients of the TNK and ALT groups, respectively (p = 1.0). DTN under 45 min was achieved in 65.4% and 58.6% (p = 0.65) of the TNK and ALT groups, respectively. DTG time was 114 (SD = 43) min for TNK versus 111 (58 = SD) min in the ALT group (p = 0.88). DTG under 90 min was achieved in 32% of the TNK group and 35% of the ALT group (p = 0.69). There were no differences in any of the clinical or safety outcomes between groups at 90 days.

Conclusions: The adoption of TNK during COVID-19 pandemic did not result in a change in EDLOS, DTN, or DTG times when compared to ALT in this cohort. Safety and clinical outcomes were similar between groups. Probably a greater benefit could have been seen in a drip and ship thrombolysis setting. Further research is needed to assess the potential advantages of TNK in drip and ship scenarios of IVT.

Introduction: Tenecteplase (TNK) has demonstrated to be non-inferior to alteplase (ALT) for intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). There are potential workflow benefits associated with TNK use, aiming to reduce patient length of stay in the emergency department. Our aim was to investigate whether the routine use of TNK during the COVID-19 pandemic influenced workflow times compared to historical use of ALT, while maintaining non-inferior clinical outcomes in a non-drip and ship scenario of a comprehensive stroke center.

Methods: We included patients with AIS admitted from September 2019 to September 2022 and compared those treated with TNK during the COVID-19 pandemic to those treated with ALT in the period immediately before. We compared emergency department length of stay (EDLOS), door-to-needle time (DTN), door-to-groin puncture time (DTG), clinical and safety outcomes with adjusted general linear regression models.

Results: 110 patients treated with TNK and 111 with ALT were included in this study. Mean EDLOS was 251 (SD = 164) min for TNK users versus 240 (SD = 148) min for ALT (p = 0.62). Mean DTN was 43 (SD = 25) min for TNK versus 46 (SD = 27) min for ALT users (p = 0.39). Mean DTN under 60 min was achieved in 86 (78.2%) patients and in 85 (76.5%) patients of the TNK and ALT groups, respectively (p = 1.0). DTN under 45 min was achieved in 65.4% and 58.6% (p = 0.65) of the TNK and ALT groups, respectively. DTG time was 114 (SD = 43) min for TNK versus 111 (58 = SD) min in the ALT group (p = 0.88). DTG under 90 min was achieved in 32% of the TNK group and 35% of the ALT group (p = 0.69). There were no differences in any of the clinical or safety outcomes between groups at 90 days.

Conclusions: The adoption of TNK during COVID-19 pandemic did not result in a change in EDLOS, DTN, or DTG times when compared to ALT in this cohort. Safety and clinical outcomes were similar between groups. Probably a greater benefit could have been seen in a drip and ship thrombolysis setting. Further research is needed to assess the potential advantages of TNK in drip and ship scenarios of IVT.

急诊用替奈普酶静脉溶栓与阿替普酶治疗急性缺血性卒中的工作时间:一项2019冠状病毒病大流行之前和期间的前瞻性队列研究
在急性缺血性卒中(AIS)的静脉溶栓(IVT)治疗中,Tenecteplase (TNK)已被证明优于阿替普酶(ALT)。使用TNK有潜在的工作流程优势,旨在减少患者在急诊科的住院时间。我们的目的是调查在COVID-19大流行期间,与历史上使用ALT相比,常规使用TNK是否会影响工作时间,同时在综合卒中中心的非点滴和船舶场景中保持非差的临床结果。方法:我们纳入2019年9月至2022年9月入院的AIS患者,并将COVID-19大流行期间接受TNK治疗的患者与之前接受ALT治疗的患者进行比较。我们比较急诊科住院时间(EDLOS)、门到针时间(DTN)、门到腹股沟穿刺时间(DTG)、临床和安全结果与调整后的一般线性回归模型。结果:110例患者接受TNK治疗,111例患者接受ALT治疗。TNK患者的平均EDLOS为251 (SD=164)分钟,ALT患者为240 (SD=148)分钟(p=0.62)。TNK组的平均DTN为43 (SD=25)分钟,ALT组为46 (SD=27)分钟(p=0.39)。TNK组和ALT组60分钟内平均DTN分别为86例(78.2%)和85例(76.5%)(p=1.0)。TNK组和ALT组45分钟内DTN分别达到65.4%和58.6% (p=0.65)。TNK组的DTG时间为114 (SD=43)分钟,ALT组为111 (58=SD)分钟(p=0.88)。TNK组和ALT组在90分钟内达到DTG的比例分别为32%和35% (p=0.69)。在90天时,两组之间的任何临床或安全性结果均无差异。结论:在该队列中,与ALT相比,在COVID - 19大流行期间采用TNK并未导致EDLOS、DTN或DTG时间的变化。两组间的安全性和临床结果相似。也许在点滴溶栓和船溶栓中可以看到更大的益处。需要进一步的研究来评估TNK在IVT滴注和船载方案中的潜在优势。
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
Cerebrovascular Diseases Extra
Cerebrovascular Diseases Extra PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: This open access and online-only journal publishes original articles covering the entire spectrum of stroke and cerebrovascular research, drawing from a variety of specialties such as neurology, internal medicine, surgery, radiology, epidemiology, cardiology, hematology, psychology and rehabilitation. Offering an international forum, it meets the growing need for sophisticated, up-to-date scientific information on clinical data, diagnostic testing, and therapeutic issues. The journal publishes original contributions, reviews of selected topics as well as clinical investigative studies. All aspects related to clinical advances are considered, while purely experimental work appears only if directly relevant to clinical issues. Cerebrovascular Diseases Extra provides additional contents based on reviewed and accepted submissions to the main journal Cerebrovascular Diseases.
×
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