Comparative Effectiveness of Intravenous Thrombolysis plus Mechanical Thrombectomy versus Mechanical Thrombectomy Alone in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION

The treatment of acute ischemic stroke due to large artery vessel occlusion experienced a dramatic development within the last decade. This meta-analysis investigates the effectiveness of bridging therapy (BT) versus mechanical thrombectomy (MT) alone in treating acute ischemic stroke.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers assessed two-arm clinical trials from Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to January 2024. Data extraction and quality were evaluated using the ROBINS-2 tool. Our primary outcomes were improvement in NIHSS scores and 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis, which included 2,638 participants from 8 randomized controlled trials, found that BT resulted in a greater improvement in NIHSS scores from baseline compared to endovascular treatment alone (mean difference [MD] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.73-1.20], p < 0.00001). Additionally, BT group achieved successful recanalization more frequently before and after thrombectomy. Thrombectomy alone hat a shorter time from stroke onset to groin puncture compared to BT (MD 9.91, 95% CI: [4.31-15.52], p = 0.005). Functional outcomes, mortality rates, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage rates, and long-term recovery metrics, such as Barthel index and modified Rankin Scale scores, were comparable between both treatment approaches.

CONCLUSION

BT is superior to endovascular treatment alone based on NIHSS score improvement and successful reperfusion rates before and after thrombectomy. Despite MT alone demonstrating a shorter time from stroke onset to groin puncture (MD of 9.91 min), it did not contribute to greater NIHSS improvement at 24 h and 7 days. Further trials with larger sample sizes are warranted to enhance precision in clinical guidance.