z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Is Intraarterial tPA Within 3 Hours the Treatment of Choice for Selected Stroke Patients?
Author(s) -
Richard I. Lindley
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
stroke
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.397
H-Index - 319
eISSN - 1524-4628
pISSN - 0039-2499
DOI - 10.1161/strokeaha.109.549766
Subject(s) - medicine , thrombolysis , stroke (engine) , neuroradiology , lacunar stroke , fibrinolytic agent , psychological intervention , angiography , emergency medicine , surgery , neurology , physical therapy , tissue plasminogen activator , ischemic stroke , ischemia , myocardial infarction , psychiatry , mechanical engineering , engineering
Routine provision of intraarterial tPA is unfeasible, not cost-effective, and would deflect stroke services from offering other far more effective interventions. The public health benefit of intraarterial tPA is negligible, and evidence from the screening log of the PROACT 2 trial suggests that this intervention has no prospect producing a measurable impact. In the PROACT 2 study, a total of 12 323 patients were screened, of whom 474 had angiograms to randomize 180 subjects in this trial—a “treatment” rate of <1.5%.1 A quarter of ischemic stroke is lacunar subtype, and angiography of the major vessels will be normal in these patients, yet current evidence suggests that patients with lacunar stroke also benefit from intravenous thrombolysis. Even large cities struggle to provide just one center with sufficient expertise to provide a 24-hour interventional stroke neuroradiology service. In addition to this feasibility data, …

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom