Publication

Insights Into Intra-arterial Thrombolysis in the Modern Era of Mechanical Thrombectomy

Downloadable Content

Persistent URL
Last modified
  • 05/20/2025
Type of Material
Authors
    Alicia C. Castonguay, University of ToledoMouhammad A. Jumaa, University of ToledoOsama O. Zaidat, St Vincent Mercy HospitalDiogo Haussen, Emory UniversityAshutosh Jadhav, University of PittsburghHisham Salahuddin, University of ToledoSyed F. Zaidi, University of Toledo
Language
  • English
Date
  • 2019-11-13
Publisher
  • Frontiers Media
Publication Version
Copyright Statement
  • © Copyright © 2019 Castonguay, Jumaa, Zaidat, Haussen, Jadhav, Salahuddin and Zaidi.
License
Final Published Version (URL)
Title of Journal or Parent Work
Volume
  • 10
Start Page
  • 1195
End Page
  • 1195
Supplemental Material (URL)
Abstract
  • Background and Purpose: The role of intra-arterial (IA) thrombolysis in modern endovascular therapy is not well-understood. Here, we surveyed neurointerventionalists to understand their current clinical practices and opinions of IA thrombolysis in the new era of mechanical thrombectomy (MT). Method: A 24-question anonymous survey was distributed via email to the members of the Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology. Results: One hundred and four responses were included in the analysis. Most respondents were interventional neurologists (76.9%) and had ≥5-years in neuro-interventional practice (80.8%). IA thrombolytics are presently used by 60.6%. Aspiration plus stent-retriever was the most common MT approach used with IA-thrombolysis (66.0%). IA-thrombolysis was used in mainly three approaches: (1) treatment of primary distal occlusions, (2) as rescue after proximal occlusion thrombectomy, and (3) or as adjunct therapy to primary MT approach. The most frequent IA-rtPA dose was 3–10 mg, with 1 mg/min infusion rate (56.6%). 84.9% do not have a standardized protocol for administering IA-rtPA. About half (50.9%) believed there should be no time limit for administering IA lytic if there is a favorable imaging profile, while 30.2% indicated ≤6 h. Most respondents (76.5%) would consider using IA-tenecteplase in a trial setting. Only 12.9% felt there was no role for IA thrombolysis in modern endovascular practice. Respondents with ≥10-years' experience were less supportive of the future of IA lytic (98.0 vs. 76.4%, p = 0.006). Conclusion: IA-thrombolysis is currently used in clinical practice; however, there is no clear consensus on best practices or criteria for administration. Further studies are needed to define the role of IA-thrombolysis in the context of MT.
Author Notes
Keywords
Research Categories
  • Biology, Neuroscience

Tools

Relations

In Collection:

Items

Thumbnail Title File Description Date Uploaded Visibility Actions
file details Publication File - vhc15.pdf Primary Content 2025-04-11 Public Download