ReviewCNS drugs2012
Pharmacological revascularization of acute ischaemic stroke: focus on challenges and novel strategies.
Review in CNS drugs, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Thrombolytic resistance: an important factor leading to the failure of intravenous thrombolytic therapy.Journal of neurology · 2026Review
- Upregulation of MicroRNA-128 in the Peripheral Blood of Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients is Correlated with Stroke Severity Partially through Inhibition of Neuronal Cell Cycle Reentry.Cell transplantation · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The only currently approved treatment for acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) is alteplase, a thrombolytic agent given intravenously (IV) within 4.5 hours of symptom onset, in an attempt to reopen occluded intracerebral arteries. However, no more than 5% of all AIS patients receive IV alteplase, mainly because of too long symptom-onset-to-hospital intervals. Moreover, this strategy is effective for less than half of the patients treated within the therapeutic window. Early recanalization is the most powerful prognostic factor, and novel drugs or therapeutic strategies are primarily aimed at improving alteplase efficacy to rapidly and safely reopen the occluded arteries. Because IV alteplase-resistant thrombi are those with the largest clot burden, responsible for the most devastating brain-tissue infarctions, development of novel approved AIS therapies is an urgent priority. At present, in the absence of controlled trials, no valid recommendations can be made. However, the most promising emerging strategy is a combination of standard or low-dose IV alteplase with an intra-arterial (IA) procedure, including additional endovascular thrombolytic and/or mechanical clot retrieval. Notably, results of open trials using the IA route had relatively disappointing clinical outcomes, despite remarkable arterial recanalization rates. Controlled trials are urgently needed to evaluate strategies including an IA route. In addition, logistic and cost constraints will likely limit their routine use, even in industrialized countries. Combining of another IV drug and IV alteplase is a far less studied option, although much easier to implement. Add-on IV drugs could be an antiplatelet glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist, a direct thrombin inhibitor or a second thrombolytic agent, e.g. tenecteplase. However, neuroimaging to measure the clot burden and infarction size will probably be necessary to predict IV alteplase failure and the subsequent use of these eventual additional therapies.
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.