Suppr超能文献

急性缺血性脑卒中的溶栓治疗

Thrombolysis for acute ischaemic stroke.

作者信息

Wardlaw J M, Zoppo G, Yamaguchi T, Berge E

机构信息

Clinical Neurosciences, The University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Crewe Rd, Edinburgh, UK, EH4 2XU.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003(3):CD000213. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000213.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The majority of strokes are due to blockage of an artery in the brain by a blood clot. Prompt treatment with thrombolytic drugs can restore blood flow before major brain damage has occurred. Successful treatment could mean that the patient is more likely to make a good recovery from their stroke. Thrombolytic drugs however, can also cause serious bleeding in the brain which can be fatal. Thrombolytic therapy has now been evaluated in several randomised trials in acute ischaemic stroke.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the safety and efficacy of thrombolytic agents in patients with acute ischaemic stroke.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched January 2003), MEDLINE (1966- January 2003) and EMBASE (1980-January 2003). In addition we contacted researchers and pharmaceutical companies, attended relevant conferences and handsearched four Japanese journals.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of any thrombolytic agent compared with control in patients with definite ischaemic stroke.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One reviewer applied the inclusion criteria and extracted the data. Trial quality was assessed. The extracted data were verified by the principal investigators of all major trials. Thus published and unpublished data were obtained where available.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighteen trials including 5727 patients were included, but not all trials contributed data to each outcome examined in this review. Sixteen trials were double-blind. The trials tested urokinase, streptokinase, recombinant tissue plasminogen activator or recombinant pro-urokinase. Two trials used intra-arterial administration but the rest used the intravenous route. About 50% of the data (patients and trials) come from trials testing intravenous tissue plasminogen activator. There are few data from patients aged over 80 years. Much of the data comes from trials conducted in the first half of the 1990s when, in an effort to reduce delays to trial drug administration, on site randomisation methods were used that, in consequence, limited the ability to stratify randomisation on key prognostic variables. Several trials, because of the biological effects of thrombolysis combined with the follow-up methods used, did not have complete blinding of outcome assessment. Thrombolytic therapy, administered up to six hours after ischaemic stroke, significantly reduced the proportion of patients who were dead or dependent (modified Rankin 3 to 6) at the end of follow-up at three to six months (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95). This was in spite of a significant increase in : the odds of death within the first ten days (odds ratio [OR] 1.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.46 to 2.24), the main cause of which was fatal intracranial haemorrhage (OR 4.34, 95% CI 3.14 to 5.99). Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage was increased following thrombolysis (OR 3.37, 95% CI 2.68 to 4.22). Thrombolytic therapy also increased the odds of death at the end of follow-up at three to six months (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.53). For patients treated within three hours of stroke, thrombolytic therapy appeared more effective in reducing death or dependency (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.83) with no statistically significant adverse effect on death (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.48). There was heterogeneity between the trials that could have been due to many trial features including : thrombolytic drug used, variation in the use of aspirin and heparin, severity of the stroke (both between trials and between treatment groups within trials), and time to treatment. Trials testing intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator suggested that it may be associated with slightly less hazard and more benefit than other drugs when given up to six hours after stroke but these are non-random comparisons - death within the first ten days OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.81, death at the end of follow-up OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.45, dead or dependent at the end of follow-up OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.93. However, no trial has directly comparedup OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.93. However, no trial has directly compared rt-PA with any other thrombolytic agent. There is some evidence that antithrombotic drugs given soon after thrombolysis may increase the risk of death.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Overall, thrombolytic therapy appears to result in a significant net reduction in the proportion of patients dead or dependent in activities of daily living. However, this appears to be net of an increase in deaths within the first seven to ten days, symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, and deaths at follow-up at three to six months. The data from trials using intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator, from which there are the most evidence on thrombolytic therapy so far, suggest that it may be associated with less hazard and more benefit. There was heterogeneity between the trials for some outcomes and the optimum criteria to identify the patients most likely to benefit and least likely to be harmed, the latest time window, the agent, dose, and route of administration, are not clear. The data are promising and may justify the use of thrombolytic therapy with intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator in experienced centres in highly selected patients where a licence exists. However, the data do not support the widespread use of thrombolytic therapy in routine clinical practice at this time, but suggest that further trials are needed to identify which patients are most likely to benefit from treatment and the environment in which it may best be given. To avoid the problem of data missing from some trials for some key outcomes encountered in this review to date, and to assist future metaanalyses, future trialists should try to collect data in such a way as to be compatible with the basic outcome assessments reviewed here (eg early death, fatal intracranial haemorrhage, poor functional outcome).

摘要

背景

大多数中风是由于血凝块阻塞大脑中的动脉所致。在大脑发生严重损伤之前,及时使用溶栓药物进行治疗可恢复血流。成功的治疗可能意味着患者更有可能从中风良好恢复。然而,溶栓药物也可能导致大脑严重出血,甚至可能致命。目前已经在几项急性缺血性中风的随机试验中对溶栓治疗进行了评估。

目的

本综述的目的是评估溶栓药物在急性缺血性中风患者中的安全性和有效性。

检索策略

我们检索了Cochrane中风小组试验注册库(最后检索时间为2003年1月)、MEDLINE(1966年至2003年1月)和EMBASE(1980年至2003年1月)。此外,我们还联系了研究人员和制药公司,参加了相关会议,并手工检索了四份日本期刊。

入选标准

在明确的缺血性中风患者中,将任何溶栓药物与对照组进行比较的随机试验。

数据收集与分析

一名综述作者应用入选标准并提取数据。评估试验质量。所有主要试验的主要研究者对提取的数据进行了核实。因此,在可获得的情况下获取了已发表和未发表的数据。

主要结果

纳入了18项试验共5727例患者,但并非所有试验都为本综述中所研究的每个结局提供了数据。16项试验为双盲试验。这些试验测试了尿激酶、链激酶、重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂或重组尿激酶原。两项试验采用动脉内给药,其余试验采用静脉给药途径。约50%的数据(患者和试验)来自测试静脉注射组织型纤溶酶原激活剂的试验。80岁以上患者的数据很少。大部分数据来自20世纪90年代上半叶进行的试验,当时为了减少试验药物给药的延迟,采用了现场随机化方法,结果限制了根据关键预后变量进行分层随机化的能力。由于溶栓的生物学效应以及所采用的随访方法,有几项试验在结局评估方面没有完全设盲。在缺血性中风后6小时内给予溶栓治疗,在3至6个月随访结束时,显著降低了死亡或依赖(改良Rankin量表评分为3至6分)患者的比例(比值比[OR]0.84,95%置信区间[CI]0.75至0.95)。尽管在前十天内死亡几率显著增加(比值比[OR]1.81,95%置信区间[CI]1.46至2.24),其主要原因是致命性颅内出血(OR 4.34,95% CI 3.14至5.99)。溶栓后症状性颅内出血增加(OR 3.37,95% CI 2.68至4.22)。溶栓治疗在3至6个月随访结束时也增加了死亡几率(OR 1.33,95% CI 1.15至1.53)。对于在中风后3小时内接受治疗的患者,溶栓治疗在降低死亡或依赖方面似乎更有效(OR 0.66,95% CI 0.53至0.83),对死亡没有统计学上的显著不良影响(OR 1.13,95% CI 0.86至1.48)。试验之间存在异质性,这可能是由于许多试验特征导致的,包括:使用的溶栓药物、阿司匹林和肝素使用的差异、中风的严重程度(试验之间以及试验内治疗组之间)以及治疗时间。测试静脉注射重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂的试验表明,在中风后6小时内给药时,与其他药物相比,它可能具有略低的风险和更多的益处,但这些是非随机比较——前十天内死亡OR 1.24,95% CI 0.85至1.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验