Faletti Donald O, Fakayode Opeyemi O, Adedara Victor O, Kuteyi Azeez O, Adedara Charles A, Ogunmoyin Temiloluwa E, Chen Jeffrey C, Olasimbo Omolara, Aina Susan A, Alozie Grant U, Sadiku Oluwatosin D, Nettagul Nate, Farrell Anesia N, Giwa Boluwatife O
Neurology, St. George's University School of Medicine, St. George's, GRD.
Medicine and Surgery, St. George's University School of Medicine, St. George's, GRD.
Cureus. 2024 Oct 24;16(10):e72323. doi: 10.7759/cureus.72323. eCollection 2024 Oct.
Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is a common cause behind a significant number of people who develop disabilities or die worldwide. Most of the strokes that occur globally are attributed to AIS as a result of large vessel occlusions that typically occur in arteries like the internal carotid and middle cerebral arteries. Primary treatments for AIS are mechanical thrombectomy (MT) and intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), and the clinical scenario can dictate what method would provide the most optimal outcome for the patient. MT has a more favorable efficacy and safety profile but can be more technically challenging and time-consuming. This article conducts a comparison with regard to safety and efficacy between MT and IVT, which are the primary treatment methods for AIS. The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Europe PubMed Central, Science Direct, and Google Scholar databases were used to search for relevant articles. This search was conducted from June 2024 to July 2024. The process involved examining the titles and abstracts of all relevant publications after which, the selected articles were read entirely to confirm eligibility. The Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions I tool was used to assess for bias in the articles selected. The management of AIS involving IVT with or without MT is highly dependent on the clinical scenario. Nevertheless, MT alone has demonstrated better or comparable functional outcomes in patients compared to both bridging therapy (BT) and IVT alone. However, it is important to note that in select patient groups, such as those with large artery atherosclerosis, BT has been able to show better efficacy than MT alone. Given the significant burden of AIS on patient quality of life and healthcare spending, it is prudent to continue to explore newer thrombolytics and thrombectomy techniques.
急性缺血性卒中(AIS)是全球大量致残或死亡患者的常见病因。全球发生的大多数卒中归因于AIS,其原因通常是颈内动脉和大脑中动脉等动脉发生大血管闭塞。AIS的主要治疗方法是机械取栓术(MT)和静脉溶栓(IVT),临床情况可以决定哪种方法能为患者提供最佳治疗效果。MT具有更有利的疗效和安全性,但技术难度可能更大且耗时更长。本文对AIS的主要治疗方法MT和IVT的安全性和疗效进行了比较。使用PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、欧洲PubMed中心、Science Direct和谷歌学术数据库搜索相关文章。该搜索于2024年6月至2024年7月进行。过程包括检查所有相关出版物的标题和摘要,之后阅读所选文章全文以确认其符合要求。使用干预性非随机研究中的偏倚风险I工具评估所选文章中的偏倚。涉及IVT联合或不联合MT的AIS治疗高度依赖于临床情况。然而,与桥接治疗(BT)和单独IVT相比,单独MT在患者中已显示出更好或相当的功能结局。然而,需要注意的是,在某些患者群体中,如患有大动脉粥样硬化的患者,BT已显示出比单独MT更好的疗效。鉴于AIS对患者生活质量和医疗支出的重大负担,继续探索更新的溶栓和取栓技术是明智的。