Key result
Intravenous rt-PA for acute ischemic stroke remains underutilized in clinical practice despite established safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Despite proven efficacy and guideline endorsements, intravenous rt-PA remains underutilized for acute ischemic stroke due to persistent clinical misunderstandings.
Intravenous rt-PA was proven safe and effective for acute ischemic stroke in 1995, approved by US FDA in 1996, and endorsed by the American Heart Association, American Academy of Neurology, and National Stroke Association in 1997. The treatment is remarkably cost-effective, despite the high cost of the drug itself and the stroke teams to give it. Community-based practicing neurologists can use t-PA for acute stroke without the need for specialized expertise. The benefit is durable over long-term follow-up and no particular subgroups, such as the elderly or those with very large strokes, should be excluded from treatment. Several additional studies have now confirmed the beneficial effects of thrombolytic therapy for stroke in de novo samples. So why isn't the drug used more? Some troubling mis-understandings in the literature seem persistent and influential among clinicians. Considerable data supports the use of rt-PA for acute ischemic stroke, which should remove remaining doubts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Patrick D. Lyden (2015) conducted an editorial in acute ischemic stroke. Intravenous rt-PA was evaluated. Intravenous rt-PA for acute ischemic stroke remains underutilized in clinical practice despite established safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: