FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2021551177> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2021551177 abstract "HomeStrokeVol. 41, No. 11Response to Letter by Kabra Free AccessLetterPDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessLetterPDF/EPUBResponse to Letter by Kabra Majaz Moonis, MD Majaz MoonisMajaz Moonis Department of Neurology, University of Massachusetts Memorial Medical Center, Worcester, MA Search for more papers by this author Originally published7 Oct 2010https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.566141Stroke. 2010;41:e592Other version(s) of this articleYou are viewing the most recent version of this article. Previous versions: October 7, 2010: Previous Version 1 Response:I thank Dr Kabra for his comments on my article, “Intra-arterial thrombolysis within 3 hours after acute ischemic stroke in selected patients,”1 When I made the statement that rescue intra-arterial thrombolysis in internal carotid artery occlusion resulted in reperfusion, which was correlated with outcome, it simply meant that where reperfusion was achieved, the outcomes were better.This is also evidence from the Interventional Management of Stroke trial overall results that 62 of the 77 patients required intra-arterial rescue therapy after the abbreviated dose of intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator. Of this subset, 56% recanalized after rescue intra-arterial therapy, and of these, 34% achieved an excellent outcome. Without successful reperfusion, the rest (12%) achieved a dismal modified Rankin score of 0 to 1. The point of my article, substantiated by the Interventional Management of Stroke-2 trial,2 was that intravenous thrombolysis is best reserved for branch occlusion–related ischemic stroke, where transcranial Doppler has demonstrated successful reperfusion, whereas for large-vessel occlusion, intravenous thrombolysis rarely achieves successful reperfusion, again based on transcranial Doppler data.Whereas the pivotal National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke trial demonstrated a good outcome across all stroke subtypes, they were arbitrarily based on TOAST criteria, not vascular or penumbral imaging, which provides a more valid and homogeneous grouping.2,3 When analyzed by stroke severity, as based on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), patients with large-vessel occlusions with an expected NIHSS score >20 did poorly, with an absolute risk reduction of <7%, not the 12% to 13% overall results depicted in the primary outcome of the study. Finally, because randomized, prospective trials are not inclusive or representative of all stroke subtypes, there will be subgroups who do better and those who do not. PROACT, a 6-hour intra-arterial pro-urokinase trial in patients with documented M1 middle cerebral artery occlusion, and the Multi-MERCI Trial, which used the MERCI Device up to 8 hours afterward in large-vessel occlusions in patients with ischemic stroke, demonstrated outcomes comparable to those of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke 3-hour window, based on treatment with intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator, where the overall NIHSS scores were lower, suggesting that in the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke trial, there was a greater proportion of milder strokes and possibly branch occlusions rather than mainstem internal carotid or basilar artery occlusions.4,5Ongoing studies, including MR RESCUE and IMS111, are using image-based, population-selection criteria and may provide the final answer for this ongoing controversy, that is, whether the present US Food and Drug Administration–approved intravenous thrombolytic therapy is better than intra-arterial interventions for large-vessel ischemic stroke (in the M1 middle cerebral, internal carotid, and basilar artery). IMS111 may also shed some light on the safety of the current practice in many tertiary stroke centers of administering full-dose intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator and then “chasing” it with intra-arterial rescue intervention, the combination being mistakenly labeled as a US Food and Drug Administration–approved standard of care, in the absence of any prospective, randomized trial demonstrating the safety or efficacy of this combination.DisclosuresNone.1 Moonis M. Intra-arterial thrombolysis within 3 hours after acute ischemic stroke in selected patients. Stroke. 2009; 40: 2611–2612.LinkGoogle Scholar2 The IMS Study Investigators. Combined intravenous and intra-arterial recanalization for acute ischemic stroke: the Interventional Management of Stroke Study. Stroke. 2004; 35: 904–911.LinkGoogle Scholar3 The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group. Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med. 1995; 333: 1581–1587.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4 del Zoppo GJ, Higashida RT, Furlan AJ, Pessin MS, Rowley HA, Gent M. PROACT: a phase II randomized trial of recombinant pro-urokinase by direct arterial delivery in acute middle cerebral artery stroke. PROACT Investigators; Prolyse in Acute Cerebral Thromboembolism. Stroke. 1998; 29: 4–11.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5 Smith WS, Sung G, Saver J, Budzik R, Duckwiler G, Liebeskind DS, Lutsep HL, Rymer MM, Higashida RT, Starkman S, Gobin YP; Multi MERCI Investigators, Frei D, Grobelny T, Hellinger F, Huddle D, Kidwell C, Koroshetz W, Marks M, Nesbit G, Silverman IE. Mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke: final results of the Multi MERCI Trial. Stroke. 2008; 39: 1205–1212.LinkGoogle Scholar Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails November 2010Vol 41, Issue 11 Advertisement Article InformationMetrics https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.566141 Originally publishedOctober 7, 2010 PDF download Advertisement" @default.
• W2021551177 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2021551177 creator A5028991610 @default.
• W2021551177 date "2010-11-01" @default.
• W2021551177 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2021551177 title "Response to Letter by Kabra" @default.
• W2021551177 cites W132472807 @default.
• W2021551177 cites W2007024354 @default.
• W2021551177 cites W2032308540 @default.
• W2021551177 cites W2292308933 @default.
• W2021551177 doi "https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.109.566141" @default.
• W2021551177 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W2021551177 type Work @default.
• W2021551177 sameAs 2021551177 @default.
• W2021551177 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2021551177 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2021551177 hasAuthorship W2021551177A5028991610 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C164705383 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C16568411 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C2776268601 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C2776572282 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C2779581417 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C2780645631 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C2909817843 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C42219234 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C500558357 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConcept C78519656 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C118552586 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C126322002 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C127413603 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C141071460 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C164705383 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C16568411 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C2776268601 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C2776572282 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C2779581417 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C2780645631 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C2909817843 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C42219234 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C500558357 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C71924100 @default.
• W2021551177 hasConceptScore W2021551177C78519656 @default.
• W2021551177 hasIssue "11" @default.
• W2021551177 hasLocation W20215511771 @default.
• W2021551177 hasOpenAccess W2021551177 @default.
• W2021551177 hasPrimaryLocation W20215511771 @default.
• W2021551177 hasRelatedWork W1978075191 @default.
• W2021551177 hasRelatedWork W2001287456 @default.
• W2021551177 hasRelatedWork W2022175645 @default.
• W2021551177 hasRelatedWork W2022244480 @default.
• W2021551177 hasRelatedWork W2059550197 @default.
• W2021551177 hasRelatedWork W2077583655 @default.
• W2021551177 hasRelatedWork W2734436088 @default.
• W2021551177 hasRelatedWork W2894754185 @default.
• W2021551177 hasRelatedWork W2970527756 @default.
• W2021551177 hasRelatedWork W3177981495 @default.
• W2021551177 hasVolume "41" @default.
• W2021551177 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2021551177 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2021551177 magId "2021551177" @default.
• W2021551177 workType "article" @default.