Safety and efficacy of tenecteplase versus alteplase in stroke patients with carotid tandem lesions: Results from the AcT trial.

Stroke endovascular tandem tenecteplase

Journal

International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society
ISSN: 1747-4949
Titre abrégé: Int J Stroke
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101274068

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
06 Oct 2023
Historique:
pubmed: 21 9 2023
medline: 21 9 2023
entrez: 21 9 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Carotid tandem lesions ((TL) ⩾70% stenosis or occlusion) account for 15-20% of acute stroke with large vessel occlusion. We investigated the safety and efficacy of intravenous tenecteplase (0.25 mg/kg) versus intravenous alteplase (0.9 mg/kg) in patients with carotid TL. This is a substudy of the alteplase compared with the tenecteplase trial. Patients with ⩾70% stenosis of the extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) and concomitant occlusion of the intracranial ICA, M1 or M2 segments of the middle cerebral artery on baseline computed tomography angiography (CTA) were included. Primary outcome was 90-day-modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-1. Secondary outcomes were mRS 0-2, mortality, and symptomatic ICH (sICH). Angiographic outcomes were successful recanalization (revised Arterial Occlusive Lesion (rAOL) 2b-3) on first and successful reperfusion (eTICI 2b-3) on final angiographic acquisitions. Multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression was performed. Among 1577 alteplase versus tenecteplase randomized controlled trial (AcT) patients, 128 (18.8%) had carotid TL. Of these, 93 (72.7%) underwent intravenous thrombolysis plus endovascular thrombectomy (IVT + EVT), while 35 (27.3%) were treated with IVT alone. In the IVT + EVT group, tenecteplase was associated with higher odds of 90-day-mRS 0-1 (46.0% vs. 32.6%, adjusted OR (aOR) 3.21; 95% CI = 1.06-9.71) compared with alteplase. No statistically significant differences in rates of mRS 0-2 (aOR 1.53; 95% CI = 0.51-4.55), initial rAOL 2b-3 (16.3% vs. 28.6%), final eTICI 2b-3 (83.7% vs. 85.7%), and mortality (18.0% vs. 16.3%) were found. SICH only occurred in one patient. There were no differences in outcomes between thrombolytic agents in the IVT-only group. In patients with carotid TL treated with EVT, intravenous tenecteplase may be associated with similar or better clinical outcomes, similar angiographic reperfusion rates, and safety outcomes as compared with alteplase.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND UNASSIGNED
Carotid tandem lesions ((TL) ⩾70% stenosis or occlusion) account for 15-20% of acute stroke with large vessel occlusion.
AIMS UNASSIGNED
We investigated the safety and efficacy of intravenous tenecteplase (0.25 mg/kg) versus intravenous alteplase (0.9 mg/kg) in patients with carotid TL.
METHODS UNASSIGNED
This is a substudy of the alteplase compared with the tenecteplase trial. Patients with ⩾70% stenosis of the extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) and concomitant occlusion of the intracranial ICA, M1 or M2 segments of the middle cerebral artery on baseline computed tomography angiography (CTA) were included. Primary outcome was 90-day-modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-1. Secondary outcomes were mRS 0-2, mortality, and symptomatic ICH (sICH). Angiographic outcomes were successful recanalization (revised Arterial Occlusive Lesion (rAOL) 2b-3) on first and successful reperfusion (eTICI 2b-3) on final angiographic acquisitions. Multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression was performed.
RESULTS UNASSIGNED
Among 1577 alteplase versus tenecteplase randomized controlled trial (AcT) patients, 128 (18.8%) had carotid TL. Of these, 93 (72.7%) underwent intravenous thrombolysis plus endovascular thrombectomy (IVT + EVT), while 35 (27.3%) were treated with IVT alone. In the IVT + EVT group, tenecteplase was associated with higher odds of 90-day-mRS 0-1 (46.0% vs. 32.6%, adjusted OR (aOR) 3.21; 95% CI = 1.06-9.71) compared with alteplase. No statistically significant differences in rates of mRS 0-2 (aOR 1.53; 95% CI = 0.51-4.55), initial rAOL 2b-3 (16.3% vs. 28.6%), final eTICI 2b-3 (83.7% vs. 85.7%), and mortality (18.0% vs. 16.3%) were found. SICH only occurred in one patient. There were no differences in outcomes between thrombolytic agents in the IVT-only group.
CONCLUSION UNASSIGNED
In patients with carotid TL treated with EVT, intravenous tenecteplase may be associated with similar or better clinical outcomes, similar angiographic reperfusion rates, and safety outcomes as compared with alteplase.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37731173
doi: 10.1177/17474930231205208
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

17474930231205208

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: A.Y.P. is the Principal investigator of the EASI-TOC trial of carotid stenting, partially funded by Stryker, Brain Canada, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, and the Canadian Stroke Consortium and is in the advisory board of and receives speaker honoraria from Roche Canada. Other authors report no conflict of interest.

Auteurs

Fouzi Bala (F)

Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology Department, University Hospital of Tours, Tours, France.

Mohammed Almekhlafi (M)

Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Nishita Singh (N)

Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.

Ibrahim Alhabli (I)

Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Ayoola Ademola (A)

Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Shelagh B Coutts (SB)

Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Yan Deschaintre (Y)

Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Montreal, QC, Canada.

Houman Khosravani (H)

Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Ramana Appireddy (R)

Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.

Francois Moreau (F)

Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.

Stephen Phillips (S)

Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Gord Gubitz (G)

Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Aleksander Tkach (A)

Kelowna General Hospital, Kelowna, BC, Canada.

Luciana Catanese (L)

Hamilton Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Dar Dowlatshahi (D)

Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

George Medvedev (G)

The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Fraser Health Authority, New Westminster, BC, Canada.

Jennifer Mandzia (J)

London Health Sciences Centre, Western University, London, ON, Canada.

Aleksandra Pikula (A)

Toronto Western Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Jay Shankar (J)

University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.

Heather Williams (H)

Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Charlottetown, PEI, Canada.

Thalia S Field (TS)

Vancouver Stroke Program, Division of Neurology, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Alejandro Manosalva (A)

Medicine Hat Regional Hospital, Medicine Hat, AB, Canada.

Muzaffar Siddiqui (M)

Grey Nuns Community Hospital, Edmonton, AB, Canada.

Atif Zafar (A)

St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Oje Imoukhoude (O)

Red Deer Regional Hospital Centre, Red Deer, AB, Canada.

Gary Hunter (G)

University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.

Faysal Benali (F)

Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

MacKenzie Horn (M)

Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Michael D Hill (MD)

Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Michel Shamy (M)

Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Tolulope T Sajobi (TT)

Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Brian H Buck (BH)

Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.

Richard H Swartz (RH)

Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Bijoy K Menon (BK)

Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Alexandre Y Poppe (AY)

Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Montreal, QC, Canada.

Classifications MeSH