ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023
The use of alteplase, although safe, does not offer clear clinical advantages when mild stroke is non-disabling.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Intravenous thrombolysis versus antiplatelet standard care for patients with mild acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Intravenous alteplase in minor nondisabling ischemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.European stroke journal · 2024Pooled it
- Prevalence and outcomes of mild stroke patients undergoing reperfusion therapy: A meta-analysis and SAFE recommendations for optimal management.Journal of central nervous system disease · 2025Article
- Intravenous thrombolysis versus dual antiplatelet therapy in minor ischemic stroke within the thrombolytic window (TAMIS): a multicenter cohort study.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: It is unknown whether alteplase is effective and safe in patients with mild acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Determining whether symptoms are "disabling" or not is a crucial factor in the management of these patients. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of alteplase in patients with mild, non-disabling AIS. Methods: We included all consecutive patients admitted for AIS at our institution from January 2015 to May 2022 who presented a baseline NIHSS score of 0-5 and fit the criteria to receive intravenous thrombolysis. In order to select only subjects with non-disabling AIS, we excluded patients who scored more than 1 point in the following NIHSS single items: vision, language, neglect, and single limb. Patients who scored at least 1 point in the NIHSS consciousness item were excluded as well. This study is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database. Results: After the application of the exclusion criteria, we included 319 patients, stratified into patients receiving and not receiving alteplase based on non-disabling symptoms. The two groups were comparable regarding demographic and clinical data. Rates of a 3-month favorable outcome, defined as a 3-month mRS score of 0-1, were similar, being 82.3% and 86.1% in the treated and untreated patients, respectively. Hemorrhagic complications and mortality occurred infrequently and were not affected by alteplase treatment. Discussion: This observational study suggests that the use of alteplase, although safe, is not associated with a better outcome in highly selected patients with non-disabling AIS.
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.