ArticleStroke (Hoboken, N.J.)2025
Intra-Arterial Thrombolysis After Mechanical Thrombectomy in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis.
Article in Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Intensive Versus Standard Blood Pressure Control After Endovascular Thrombectomy in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Pooled it
- Aspirin plus clopidogrel versus aspirin alone in patients with mild-to-moderate stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Beyond Recanalization: A Mechanistic and Procedural Framework for Adjunct Pharmacologic Therapy During Mechanical Thrombectomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Beyond Direct Fibrinolysis: Novel Approaches to Thrombolysis.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Efficacy and safety of bridging intravenous thrombolysis before mechanical thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The potential role of adjunctive intra-arterial thrombolysis (IAT) in improving outcomes following mechanical thrombectomy (MT) remains unclear. This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of IAT after MT compared to MT alone in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to January 2025 with no language restrictions. Additionally, grey literature sources were explored. Randomized controlled trials comparing IAT after MT versus MT alone in acute ischemic stroke were included. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were pooled using a random-effects model in R. Trial sequential analysis was performed for the primary favorable outcomes assuming a 30% relative risk increase, an alpha level of 5%, and 80% power. The primary outcome was excellent functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0-1 at 90 days); secondary outcomes included good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0-2), symptomatic and any intracranial hemorrhage, and severe adverse events. Results: Four randomized controlled trials encompassing 1395 patients (MT and IAT: 701; MT alone: 694) met the inclusion criteria. The pooled analysis demonstrated significantly improved excellent functional outcome (OR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.06-1.63]) in patients receiving IAT after MT compared with MT alone. No statistically significant difference was observed for good functional outcome (OR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.86-1.32]), all-cause death (OR, 0.92 [95% CI 0.70-1.21]), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 1.31 [95% CI, 0.74-2.34]), any intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 1.30 [95% CI, 0.96-1.76]), and severe adverse events (OR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.67-1.66]). Trial sequential analysis revealed sufficient evidence to confirm a 30% relative risk increase for excellent functional outcome. The overall quality of evidence was moderate except for good functional outcome, rated as low. Conclusion: IAT following MT was associated with increased odds of excellent functional outcomes at 90 days compared with MT alone, with no significant differences observed in intracranial hemorrhage, all-cause mortality, or severe adverse events.
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.