User login
The evidence is not strong enough to recommend routine use of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) in the setting of acute ischemic stroke.
Although independence in activities of daily living 3 to 6 months later is better in those who receive rtPA, acute adverse events (including fatal intracranial hemorrhage) also significantly increase. Given the potentially fatal risks and heterogeneity of results among trials, thrombolytic therapy in the setting of acute ischemic stroke needs more investigation. In the future, we may be able to define a more specific group of patients for whom the potential benefits clearly outweigh the risks.
The evidence is not strong enough to recommend routine use of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) in the setting of acute ischemic stroke.
Although independence in activities of daily living 3 to 6 months later is better in those who receive rtPA, acute adverse events (including fatal intracranial hemorrhage) also significantly increase. Given the potentially fatal risks and heterogeneity of results among trials, thrombolytic therapy in the setting of acute ischemic stroke needs more investigation. In the future, we may be able to define a more specific group of patients for whom the potential benefits clearly outweigh the risks.
The evidence is not strong enough to recommend routine use of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) in the setting of acute ischemic stroke.
Although independence in activities of daily living 3 to 6 months later is better in those who receive rtPA, acute adverse events (including fatal intracranial hemorrhage) also significantly increase. Given the potentially fatal risks and heterogeneity of results among trials, thrombolytic therapy in the setting of acute ischemic stroke needs more investigation. In the future, we may be able to define a more specific group of patients for whom the potential benefits clearly outweigh the risks.