↓ Skip to main content

Periprocedural Antithrombotic Treatment During Acute Mechanical Thrombectomy for Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Periprocedural Antithrombotic Treatment During Acute Mechanical Thrombectomy for Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, April 2018
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2018.00238
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rob A. van de Graaf, Vicky Chalos, Gregory J. del Zoppo, Aad van der Lugt, Diederik W. J. Dippel, Bob Roozenbeek

Abstract

More than one-third of the patients with ischemic stroke caused by an intracranial large vessel occlusion do not recover to functional independence despite fast and successful recanalization by acute mechanical thrombectomy (MT). This may partially be explained by incomplete microvascular reperfusion. Some antithrombotics, e.g., antiplatelet agents and heparin, may be able to restore microvascular reperfusion. However, antithrombotics may also increase the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). The aim of this review was to assess the potential safety and functional outcome of periprocedural antiplatelet or heparin use during acute MT for ischemic stroke. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane for studies investigating the safety and functional outcome of periprocedural antiplatelet or heparin treatment during acute MT for ischemic stroke. The primary outcome was the risk for sICH. Secondary outcomes were functional independence after 3-6 months (modified Rankin Scale 0-2) and mortality within 6 months. 837 studies were identified through the search, of which 19 studies were included. The sICH risks of the periprocedural use of antiplatelets ranged from 6 to 17%, and for heparin from 5 to 12%. Two of four studies reporting relative effects of the use of antithrombotics are pointing toward an increased risk of sICH. Among patients treated with antiplatelet agents, functional independence varied from 23 to 60% and mortality from 18 to 33%. For heparin, this was, respectively, 19-54% and 19-33%. The three studies presenting relative effects of antiplatelets on functional independence showed neutral effects. Both studies reporting relative effects of heparin on functional independence found it to increase this chance. Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of periprocedural antithrombotic treatment in MT are lacking. Some observational studies report a slight increase in sICH risk, which may be acceptable because they also suggest a beneficial effect on functional outcome. Therefore, randomized controlled trials are warranted to address the question whether the potentially higher risk of sICH could be outweighed by improved functional outcome.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Researcher 7 10%
Other 6 9%
Professor 4 6%
Other 15 22%
Unknown 19 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 37%
Neuroscience 5 7%
Engineering 2 3%
Unspecified 1 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 26 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 21 April 2018.
All research outputs
#7,453,406
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#4,627
of 11,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,905
of 296,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#93
of 278 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,948 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 296,868 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 278 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.