Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Intravenous thrombolysis in patients with recent intake of direct oral anticoagulants: A target trial analysis after the liberalization of institutional guidelines
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Intravenous thrombolysis in patients with recent intake of direct oral anticoagulants: A target trial analysis after the liberalization of institutional guidelines
Do you wish to request the book?
Intravenous thrombolysis in patients with recent intake of direct oral anticoagulants: A target trial analysis after the liberalization of institutional guidelines
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Intravenous thrombolysis in patients with recent intake of direct oral anticoagulants: A target trial analysis after the liberalization of institutional guidelines
2024
Overview
Introduction:
This study aimed to report the safety and efficacy of off-label intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with alteplase after sequentially liberalizing our institutional guidelines allowing IVT for patients under direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) regardless of plasma levels, time of last intake, and without prior anticoagulation reversal therapy.
Patients and methods:
We utilized the target-trial methodology to emulate hypothetical criteria of a randomized controlled trial in our prospective stroke registry. Consecutive DOAC patients (06/2021–11/2023) otherwise qualifying for IVT were included. Safety and efficacy outcomes (symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage [ICH], any radiological ICH, major bleeding, 90-day mortality, 90-day good functional outcome [mRS 0–2 or return to baseline]) were assessed using inverse-probability-weighted regression-adjustment comparing patients with versus without IVT.
Results:
Ninety eight patients fulfilled the target-trial criteria. IVT was given in 49/98 (50%) patients at a median of 178 (interquartile range 134–285) min after symptom onset with median DOAC plasma level of 77 ng/ml (15 patients had plasma levels > 100 ng/ml; 25/49 [51%] were treated within 12 h after last DOAC ingestion). Endovascular therapy was more frequent in patients without IVT (73% vs 33%). Symptomatic ICH occurred in 0/49 patients receiving IVT and 2/49 patients without IVT (adjusted difference −2.5%; 95% CI −5.9 to 0.8). The rates of any radiological ICH were comparable. Patients receiving IVT were more likely to have good functional outcomes.
Discussion and conclusion:
After liberalizing our approach for IVT regardless of recent DOAC intake, we did not experience any safety concerns. The association of IVT with better functional outcomes warrants prospective randomized controlled trials.
Graphical abstract
Publisher
SAGE Publications,Oxford University Press
Subject
