Efficacy and safety of intravenous thrombolysis with tenecteplase in acute ischemic stroke across different time windows: a Meta-analysis
10.3760/cma.j.cn115354-20250630-00381
- VernacularTitle:替奈普酶静脉溶栓治疗不同时间窗急性缺血性脑卒中有效性及安全性的Meta分析
- Author:
Yejun SHI
1
;
Yulei JING
;
Xin NIE
;
Le YAO
;
Mengjie FAN
;
Chaosheng LI
Author Information
1. 江南大学附属医院神经内科，无锡 214122
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Tenecteplase;
Intravenous thrombolysis;
Time window;
Acute ischemic stroke;
Efficacy;
Safety
- From:
Chinese Journal of Neuromedicine
2025;24(8):806-816
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous thrombolysis with tenecteplase (TNK) in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) across different time windows.Methods:Randomized controlled trials investigating TNK in AIS were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang databases, with data collected up to May 2025. Experimental group received intravenous thrombolysis with 0.25 mg/kg TNK, either alone or in combination with mechanical thrombectomy (MT). Control group received alteplase, placebo, standard medication (containing butylphthalide), MT, or above-mentioned drugs combined with MT. These patients were within 4.5 hours of onset (within-time window) or within 4.5-24 hours of onset (extended-time window). Efficacy indexes included functional outcome excellent rate (modified Rankin scale [mRS] score of 0-1 at 3 months after treatment), early neurological improvement rate (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] score improvement≥4 or NIHSS score ranged 0-1 within 72 of treatment), and recanalization rate 24 h after treatment. Safety indexes comprised symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) rate within 48 h of treatment, and mortality rate and rate of serious adverse events (SAEs) within 90 d of treatment. Quality of the trials was assessed according to Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (version 5.1). Meta-analysis was conducted using Stata software, with pooling data as risk difference ( RD). Results:Sixteen articles (11 were within-time window ones, and 5 were extended-time window ones), involving 9,430 AIS patients, were included. Quality grade of these articles is B-level. (1) In articles of within-time window: the experimental group had a significantly higher functional outcome excellent rate compared with the control group ( RD=0.031, 95% CI: 0.009-0.052, P=0.005); no significant difference was observed in early neurological improvement rate ( RD=0.016, 95% CI: -0.012-0.043, P=0.260), recanalization rate ( RD=0.040, 95% CI: 0.000-0.081, P=0.053), sICH rate ( RD=0.005, 95% CI: -0.002-0.012, P=0.198), mortality rate ( RD=0.000, 95% CI: -0.012-0.013, P=0.950), or SAE rate ( RD=0.003, 95% CI: -0.028-0.033, P=0.870) between the two groups. (2) In articles of extended-time window: the experimental group exhibited significantly higher functional outcome excellent rate ( RD=0.064, 95% CI: 0.016-0.113, P=0.009), early neurological improvement rate ( RD=0.101, 95% CI: 0.023-0.180, P=0.012), and recanalization rate ( RD=0.131, 95% CI: 0.059-0.203, P<0.001) compared with the control group; no significant difference was found in sICH rate ( RD=0.014, 95% CI: -0.003-0.032, P=0.097), mortality rate ( RD=0.006, 95% CI: -0.030-0.041, P=0.752), or SAE rate ( RD=0.030, 95% CI: -0.037-0.097, P=0.385) between the two groups. Conclusion:Intravenous thrombolysis with TNK is safe and effective in AIS patients at both within-time window and extended-time window.
