ArticleArchives of medical science : AMS2010
Intra-arterial versus intra-venous thrombolysis within and after the first 3 hours of stroke onset.
Article in Archives of medical science : AMS, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative effectiveness of intra-arterial thrombolysis vs. mechanical thrombectomy: a literature review.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Contemporary Methods for Detection and Intervention of Distal Medium and Small Vessel Occlusions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Understanding the Radial Force of Stroke Thrombectomy Devices to Minimize Vessel Wall Injury: Mechanical Bench Testing of the Radial Force Generated by a Novel Braided Thrombectomy Assist Device Compared to Laser-Cut Stent Retrievers in Simulated MCA Vessel Diameters.Interventional neurology · 2020Article
- Recent Trends in Clot Retrieval Devices: A Review.Cardiology and therapy · 2017Review
- Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa polymorphism HPA-3 b/b is associated with increased risk of ischemic stroke in patients under 60 years of age.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The NINDS trial demonstrated for the first time the effectiveness of intravenous thrombolysis in improving outcome after acute ischemic stroke. The absolute benefit of this intervention was 11-13% greater chance of being normal or near normal (MRS ≤ 1) at 3 months. However, if patients with severe stroke were considered (NIHSS ≥ 20), the absolute benefit dropped to 5-6%, indicating that IV thrombolysis may not be as effective for large vessel occlusion. This observation was further supported by TCD studies that clearly demonstrated that large artery occlusions had a recanalization rate of 13-18% with IV rt-PA. Intra-arterial thrombolysis achieves recanalization rates of 60-70%. Since tissue viability is clearly important, it is time to stop defining rigid time windows and if there is a large penumbra (20-50%) and the occlusion is in a large artery, there exists a logic and a growing evidence to consider either bridge therapy or direct intra-arterial therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.