Intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke patients taking a DOAC showed no significant difference in symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage compared to no oral anticoagulant (OR 0.8; 95% CI 0.48-1.33).
Meta-Analysis (n=873)
Does intravenous thrombolysis alone increase symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage in adult patients with acute ischemic stroke taking a DOAC?
Intravenous thrombolysis as sole recanalization therapy for acute ischemic stroke appears safe in patients taking a DOAC, with no significant difference in symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage compared to those not on oral anticoagulants or on a VKA.
Effect estimate: OR 0.8 (95% CI 0.48-1.33)
Recent guidelines for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) indicate administration of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) is not firmly established and may be harmful unless certain potential parameters are met. This systematic review and meta-analysis explores safety outcomes and other clinical parameters from the growing number of publications describing patients taking a DOAC who experience an AIS that is treated acutely with IVT alone. Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and PubMed were searched up to January 9, 2024 for studies including adult patients taking a DOAC who experienced an AIS treated with IVT and did not undergo endovascular therapy (EVT), regardless of the use of an anticoagulation reversal agent. Primary safety outcomes evaluated included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), any intracranial hemorrhage, and in-hospital mortality. A total of 873 patients from 78 studies, primarily case reports or case series of patients receiving dabigatran with or without idarucizumab reversal (n = 340), were included in the review. The rate of sICH during the index hospitalization was 3.3%. Seven high-quality studies with low risk of bias included outcomes for patients on DOAC and comparator groups of either patients not taking an oral anticoagulant (no OAC) or patients taking a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) with INR primarily <1.7 at the time of AIS. No significant difference was observed in the incidence of sICH among patients receiving DOAC vs. no OAC (odds ratio OR 0.8, 95% confidence interval CI: 0.48-1.33) or among patients receiving DOAC vs. VKA (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.59-1.75). Similar findings of no difference were observed for other safety outcomes. Findings from this study suggest that utilization of IVT as sole recanalization therapy for AIS may be safe in patients taking a DOAC; however, further studies are needed to elucidate specific parameters that differentiate timepoints and variables to ensure safe, optimal treatment.
Roberts et al. (Mon,) conducted a meta-analysis in Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) (n=873). Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) vs. No oral anticoagulant (no OAC) or vitamin K antagonist (VKA) was evaluated on Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) (OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.48-1.33). Intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke patients taking a DOAC showed no significant difference in symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage compared to no oral anticoagulant (OR 0.8; 95% CI 0.48-1.33).