SynthesisClinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Thrombolytics in Ischemic Stroke Beyond the 4.5-Hour Time Window: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparing Efficacy and Safety of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy versus Intravenous Thrombolytics in Acute Minor Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisPooled it
- Perfusion-guided thrombolysis beyond 4.5 hours for acute ischemic stroke: A time-stratified systematic review and meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundStroke significantly impacts global health, and IV thrombolytics such as tenecteplase and alteplase are time sensitive. While they show promise beyond 4.5 h, evidence is inconclusive. This meta-analysis assesses IVT's efficacy and safety past 4.5 h.MethodsPubMed, Cochrane Central, and ScienceDirect were searched till August 2025. The risk ratios (RR) were pooled along with 95% confidence intervals under the random effect model using the Review Manager version 5.4.1.ResultsThirteen randomized trials involving 3602 patients were analyzed. Compared to the control group, IVT significantly improved the rates of excellent (RR = 1.22; 95%CI: [1.13, 1.31];p < 0.00001; I
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.