Key result
IV thrombolysis linked to ~39% higher odds of excellent functional recovery in mild ischemic stroke.
Why the study?
Does intravenous thrombolytic therapy improve functional outcomes in patients with mild acute ischemic stroke?
Cohort (n=3,472)
Yes
Does intravenous thrombolytic therapy improve functional outcomes in patients with mild acute ischemic stroke?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Intravenous thrombolysis may improve functional outcomes in patients with mild ischemic stroke (NIHSS 2-5), challenging recent trial data that showed no clear benefit.
BACKGROUND: Intravenous thrombolytic therapy (IVT) is recommended for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and disabling deficits, regardless of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score. The benefit of IVT in patients with mild AIS was, however, not documented in recent trials. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of IVT in mild AIS in a nationwide registry-based study. METHODS: 5 at admission were included. Using 1:1 propensity score matching, 1736 IVT-treated patients were matched with 1736 controls. Primary outcome was excellent functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score 0-1) at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included mRS 0-2, a favorable mRS shift (range 0-6), and death within 28 and 90 days. Data on symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) were available only for the IVT group. RESULTS: At 90 days, 68.4% of IVT-treated patients and 61.2% of controls achieved mRS 0-1 (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.20-1.60). IVT was associated with a higher probability of achieving excellent functional outcome in patients with NIHSS 4-5 (OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.06-2.21) and NIHSS 2-3 (OR 1.64; 95% CI 1.32-2.03), but not NIHSS 0-1 (OR 1.14; 95% CI 0.89-1.44). No significant differences in overall mortality were observed. SICH occurred in 3.7% of IVT-treated patients. CONCLUSION: IVT was associated with favorable functional outcomes for mild AIS, but not in patients with NIHSS 0-1.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kristensen et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Mild acute ischemic stroke (n=3,472). Intravenous thrombolytic therapy vs. No intravenous thrombolytic therapy was evaluated on Excellent functional outcome (mRS score 0-1) at 90 days (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.20-1.60, p=<0.001). Intravenous thrombolytic therapy was associated with a higher likelihood of achieving an excellent functional outcome at 90 days compared to no thrombolysis in patients with mild acute ischemic stroke.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: