Evidence Hub

The rate of early neurological deterioration occurring after thrombolytic therapy: A meta-analysis

Hou X, Chen W, Xu H, Zhu Z, Xu Y, Chen H

Brain and behavior, 2019

3,539 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The rate of early neurological deterioration (END) occurring after thrombolytic therapy is controversial. To explore a more precise estimation of the rate, a meta-analysis was conducted in the present study.

METHODS: The relevant studies were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Collaboration Database up to June 2018. The definition of END was prespecified according to the most commonly used definition: ≥4-point increase in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale between admission and 24 hr. The meta-analysis was performed by using the STATA 12.

RESULTS: Eleven studies with a total of 3,539 subjects, including 373 patients with END and 3,166 patients without END, were collected. The pooled analysis showed that the rate of END occurring after thrombolytic therapy was about 11.0% (95% CI: 7.8%-14.3%). Subgroup analysis by continent showed that the rate of END occurring after thrombolytic therapy of patients in Asia (15.9%, 95% CI: 7.4%-24.5%) was higher than in Europe (7.6%, 95% CI: 4.9%-10.3%) and in North America (11.8%, 95% CI: 8.5%-15.0%). Subgroup analysis by onset to treatment time (OTT) displayed that the rate of END occurring after thrombolytic therapy was 5.4% (95% CI: 1.2%-9.5%), 15.6% (95% CI: 9.6%-21.5%), and 18.5% (95% CI: 11.2%-25.8%) for the patients whose OTT ≤120.0 min, from 120.1 to 179.9 min, from 180.0 to 270.0 min, respectively.

CONCLUSION: The rate of END occurring after thrombolytic therapy is about 11.0%. This finding may…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 3,539 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free