Comparison of thrombolytic agents in treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke; findings from a single centre follow up study in real-life settings.

Abstract

Background and objectivesHealth outcome data of thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke in real life-settings in India are scarce. We studied the clinical profile, risk factors and functional outcome of patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) who were thrombolysed. MethodsIn a single centre retrospective study from January 2017 to June 2020, we analysed the data of adult patients with AIS presented within 4.5 h of symptom onset. We included patients if they had NIHSS score ≥4, modified Rankin score of 2 or less before the stroke onset and without evidence of haemorrhage. Modified Rankin score of two or less at the end of three months was defined as the primary efficacy outcome. The development of symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage was considered as the primary safety outcome. We tried to analyse the primary safety and efficacy outcomes between two thrombolytic agents. ResultsNinety patients (Tenecteplase = 61; Alteplase, n = 29) underwent stroke thrombolysis during the study period. The mean age was 64.3 years in Tenecteplase group and 63.2 years in Alteplase group. Twenty patients were aged more than 75 years. Hypertension was the most common comorbidity in both the groups (72% and 72.4%). Median mRS score at 3-months was 1 in Tenecteplase group and 0.5 in Alteplase group (p < 0.001), however there was no statistically significant difference between both treatment groups in terms of NIHS score at 24 h (70.4% vs 51.7%, p = 0.08), functional recovery calculated with mRS at 3-month (83.6% vs 79.3%, p = 0.62) or in terms of symptomatic ICH (9.8% and 17.2% p = 0.36). ConclusionTenecteplase appears to have similar clinical outcomes as Alteplase for stroke thrombolysis. Given the relatively low-cost and ease of administration, Tenecteplase may be better than Alteplase for management of acute ischemic stroke.