Key result
Continuous argatroban infusion shows no significant benefit over intermittent infusion for acute ischemic stroke symptoms.
Why the study?
The appropriate dose and administration route of argatroban after day 3 in acute ischemic stroke patients were unclear, with no prior comparisons reported.
Population
107 ischemic stroke patients treated with argatroban
Comparison
Continuous infusion vs intravenous infusion of argatroban after day 3
Design
Retrospective cohort study
Follow-up
Days 3 to 7
Authors
Loading...
Argatroban route was not associated with symptom worsening in acute stroke; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Cohort (n=107)
No
Odds Ratio: 0.347 (95% CI 0.093–1.3)
Absolute Event Rate: 6.5% vs 16.7%
p-value: p=0.104
Sunaga et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Acute ischemic stroke (n=107). Continuous argatroban infusion vs. Intravenous argatroban infusion (twice daily) was evaluated on Worsening of symptoms from days 3 to 7 (OR 0.347, 95% CI 0.093-1.300, p=0.104). Continuous argatroban infusion was not significantly associated with a difference in the worsening of symptoms compared to intravenous infusion in acute ischemic stroke patients (6.5% vs 16.7%, p=0.104).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: