Endovascular Recanalization Therapy in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Updated Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Recent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have demonstrated benefits of endovascular recanalization therapy (ERT) contrary to earlier trials. We aimed to estimate the benefits of ERT added to standard therapy in acute ischemic stroke. From a literature search of RCTs testing ERT, we performed a meta-...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of stroke Vol. 17; no. 3; pp. 268 - 281
Main Authors Hong, Keun-Sik, Ko, Sang-Bae, Lee, Ji Sung, Yu, Kyung-Ho, Rha, Joung-Ho
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Korea (South) Korean Stroke Society 01.09.2015
대한뇌졸중학회
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN2287-6391
1229-4101
2287-6405
DOI10.5853/jos.2015.17.3.268

Cover

More Information
Summary:Recent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have demonstrated benefits of endovascular recanalization therapy (ERT) contrary to earlier trials. We aimed to estimate the benefits of ERT added to standard therapy in acute ischemic stroke. From a literature search of RCTs testing ERT, we performed a meta-analysis to estimate an overall efficacy and safety of ERT for all trials, stent-retriever trials, and RCTs comparing ERT and intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IV-TPA). We identified 15 relevant RCTs including 2,899 patients. For all trials, ERT was associated with increased good outcomes (odds ratio [OR] 1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34, 2.40; P<0.001) compared to the control. ERT also increased no or minimal disability outcomes, good neurological recovery, good activity of daily living, and recanalization. ERT did not significantly increase symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH) (OR 1.19; 95% CI 0.83, 1.69; P=0.345) or death (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.71, 1.05; P=0.151). In contrast, ERT significantly reduced extreme disability or death (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.61, 0.97; P=0.025). Restricting to five stent-retriever trials comparing ERT plus IV-TPA vs. IV-TPA alone, the benefit was even greater for good outcome (OR 2.39; 95% CI 1.88, 3.04; P<0.001) and extreme disability or death (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.41, 0.78; P=0.001). Restricting to eight RCTs comparing ERT (plus IV-TPA in six trials) with IV-TPA alone showed similar efficacy and safety. This updated meta-analysis shows that ERT substantially improves clinical outcomes and reduces extreme disability or death without significantly increasing SICH compared to standard therapy.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ObjectType-Review-3
content type line 23
Keun-Sik Hong and Sang-Bae Ko contributed equally to the manuscript as first authors.
G704-SER000008649.2015.17.3.008
ISSN:2287-6391
1229-4101
2287-6405
DOI:10.5853/jos.2015.17.3.268