Cui Yu, Zhao Zi-Ai, Wang Jia-Qi, Qiu Si-Qi, Shen Xin-Yu, Li Ze-Yu, Hu Hai-Zhou, Chen Hui-Sheng
Department of Neurology, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Shenyang, China.
CNS Neurosci Ther. 2024 Jul;30(7):e14868. doi: 10.1111/cns.14868.
Systolic blood pressure (SBP) was a predictor of early neurological deterioration (END) in stroke. We performed a secondary analysis of ARAMIS trial to investigate whether baseline SBP affects the effect of dual antiplatelet versus intravenous alteplase on END.
This post hoc analysis included patients in the as-treated analysis set. According to SBP at admission, patients were divided into SBP ≥140 mmHg and SBP <140 mmHg subgroups. In each subgroup, patients were further classified into dual antiplatelet and intravenous alteplase treatment groups based on study drug actually received. Primary outcome was END, defined as an increase of ≥2 in the NIHSS score from baseline within 24 h. We investigated effect of dual antiplatelet vs intravenous alteplase on END in SBP subgroups and their interaction effect with subgroups.
A total of 723 patients from as-treated analysis set were included: 344 were assigned into dual antiplatelet group and 379 into intravenous alteplase group. For primary outcome, there was more treatment effect of dual antiplatelet in SBP ≥140 mmHg subgroup (adjusted RD, -5.2%; 95% CI, -8.2% to -2.3%; p < 0.001) and no effect in SBP <140 mmHg subgroup (adjusted RD, -0.1%; 95% CI, -8.0% to 7.7%; p = 0.97), but no significant interaction between subgroups was found (adjusted p = 0.20).
Among patients with minor nondisabling acute ischemic stroke, dual antiplatelet may be better than alteplase with respect to preventing END within 24 h when baseline SBP ≥140 mmHg.
收缩压(SBP)是卒中早期神经功能恶化(END)的一个预测指标。我们对ARAMIS试验进行了二次分析,以研究基线收缩压是否会影响双联抗血小板治疗与静脉注射阿替普酶对END的疗效。
这项事后分析纳入了接受治疗分析集中的患者。根据入院时的收缩压,患者被分为收缩压≥140 mmHg和收缩压<140 mmHg亚组。在每个亚组中,根据实际接受的研究药物,患者进一步分为双联抗血小板治疗组和静脉注射阿替普酶治疗组。主要结局为END,定义为24小时内美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)评分较基线增加≥2分。我们研究了双联抗血小板治疗与静脉注射阿替普酶对收缩压亚组中END的疗效及其与亚组的交互作用。
总共纳入了723例来自接受治疗分析集的患者:344例被分配到双联抗血小板治疗组,379例被分配到静脉注射阿替普酶治疗组。对于主要结局,在收缩压≥140 mmHg亚组中,双联抗血小板治疗的疗效更显著(调整后的风险差,-5.2%;95%置信区间,-8.2%至-2.3%;p<0.001),而在收缩压<140 mmHg亚组中无疗效(调整后的风险差,-0.1%;95%置信区间,-8.0%至7.7%;p=0.97),但未发现亚组间有显著的交互作用(调整后的p=0.20)。
在轻度非致残性急性缺血性卒中患者中,当基线收缩压≥140 mmHg时,双联抗血小板治疗在预防24小时内的END方面可能优于阿替普酶。