Personalizar preferências de consentimento

Utilizamos cookies para ajudar você a navegar com eficiência e executar certas funções. Você encontrará informações detalhadas sobre todos os cookies sob cada categoria de consentimento abaixo.

Os cookies que são classificados com a marcação “Necessário” são armazenados em seu navegador, pois são essenciais para possibilitar o uso de funcionalidades básicas do site.... 

Sempre ativo

Os cookies necessários são cruciais para as funções básicas do site e o site não funcionará como pretendido sem eles. Esses cookies não armazenam nenhum dado pessoalmente identificável.

Bem, cookies para exibir.

Cookies funcionais ajudam a executar certas funcionalidades, como compartilhar o conteúdo do site em plataformas de mídia social, coletar feedbacks e outros recursos de terceiros.

Bem, cookies para exibir.

Cookies analíticos são usados para entender como os visitantes interagem com o site. Esses cookies ajudam a fornecer informações sobre métricas o número de visitantes, taxa de rejeição, fonte de tráfego, etc.

Bem, cookies para exibir.

Os cookies de desempenho são usados para entender e analisar os principais índices de desempenho do site, o que ajuda a oferecer uma melhor experiência do usuário para os visitantes.

Bem, cookies para exibir.

Os cookies de anúncios são usados para entregar aos visitantes anúncios personalizados com base nas páginas que visitaram antes e analisar a eficácia da campanha publicitária.

Bem, cookies para exibir.

Safety and Functional Outcome of Thrombolysis in Dissection-Related Ischemic Stroke: A Meta-Analysis

Compartilhe ►

Background and Purpose—

The safety and efficacy of thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection (CAD) are controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to pool all individual patient data and provide a valid estimate of safety and outcome of thrombolysis in CAD.

Methods—

We performed a systematic literature search on intravenous and intra-arterial thrombolysis in CAD. We calculated the rates of pooled symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and mortality and indirectly compared them with matched controls from the Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis in Stroke–International Stroke Thrombolysis Register. We applied multivariate regression models to identify predictors of excellent (modified Rankin Scale=0 to 1) and favorable (modified Rankin Scale=0 to 2) outcome.

Results—

We obtained individual patient data of 180 patients from 14 retrospective series and 22 case reports. Patients were predominantly female (68%), with a mean±SD age of 46±11 years. Most patients presented with severe stroke (median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score=16). Treatment was intravenous thrombolysis in 67% and intra-arterial thrombolysis in 33%. Median follow-up was 3 months. The pooled symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage rate was 3.1% (95% CI, 1.3 to 7.2). Overall mortality was 8.1% (95% CI, 4.9 to 13.2), and 41.0% (95% CI, 31.4 to 51.4) had an excellent outcome. Stroke severity was a strong predictor of outcome. Overlapping confidence intervals of end points indicated no relevant differences with matched controls from the Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis in Stroke–International Stroke Thrombolysis Register.

Conclusions—

Safety and outcome of thrombolysis in patients with CAD-related stroke appear similar to those for stroke from all causes. Based on our findings, thrombolysis should not be withheld in patients with CAD.

http://stroke.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/short/42/9/2515?rss=1