↓ Skip to main content

Tenecteplase versus alteplase for management of acute ischemic stroke: a pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
87 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 Mendeley
Title
Tenecteplase versus alteplase for management of acute ischemic stroke: a pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
Published in
Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, August 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11239-018-1721-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Babikir Kheiri, Mohammed Osman, Ahmed Abdalla, Tarek Haykal, Sahar Ahmed, Mustafa Hassan, Ghassan Bachuwa, Mohammed Al Qasmi, Deepak L. Bhatt

Abstract

Tenecteplase is a genetically mutated variant of alteplase with superior pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties. However, its efficacy and safety in acute ischemic strokes are limited. Hence, we conducted a study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tenecteplase compared with alteplase in acute ischemic stroke. Electronic databases were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing tenecteplase with alteplase in acute ischemic stroke patients eligible for thrombolysis. We evaluated various efficacy and safety outcomes using random-effects models for both pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analyses along with meta-regression analyses. We included 5 RCTs with a total of 1585 patients. Compared with alteplase, tenecteplase treatment was associated with significantly greater complete recanalization (odd ratio [OR] 2.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-3.87; p = 0.04) and early neurological improvement (OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.01-2.03; p = 0.05). There were no differences between the two thrombolytics in terms of excellent recovery (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0-1; OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.95-1.44; p = 0.13), functional independence (mRS 0-2; OR 1.24; 95% CI 0.78-1.98), poor recovery (mRS 4-6; OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.49-1.25; p = 0.31), complete/partial recanalization (OR 1.51; 95% CI 0.70-3.26; p = 0.30), any intracerebral hemorrhage (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.56-1.17; p = 0.26), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.52-1.83; p = 0.94), or mortality (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.54-1.26; p = 0.38). In network meta-analysis, there were better efficacy and imaging-based outcomes with tenecteplase 0.25 mg/kg without increased risk of safety outcomes. Our results demonstrate that in acute ischemic stroke, thrombolysis with tenecteplase is at least as effective and safe as alteplase.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 113 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Other 8 7%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 20 18%
Unknown 47 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 32%
Neuroscience 8 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 49 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 May 2023.
All research outputs
#2,622,230
of 24,160,198 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
#85
of 1,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,834
of 305,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
#3
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,160,198 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,020 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 305,179 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.