Introduction:

intravenous thrombolysis is a key part of the acute treatment of patients with ischemic stroke. There is a growing interest in the use of tenecteplase as a thrombolytic alternative to alteplase. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical effectiveness of tenecteplase versus alteplase in intravenous thrombolysis for ischemic stroke.

Method:

a single-center, bispective cohort study of all patients admitted with ischemic stroke who received intravenous thrombolytics from 2019 to 2022. Patients treated with tenecteplase were prospectively compared with those treated with alteplase as a historical control. Chi-square or Fisher’s exact test was used for the association of categorical variables, and the Wilcoxon test was used for median comparison A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered significant.

Results:

a total of 69 patients were included in the study (33 received alteplase and 36 received tenecteplase). The median NIHSS scale score was 11 (IQR 8-18), and the median time from symptom onset to needle was 160 minutes (IQR 120-208). No statistically significant differences were found between Glasgow Coma Scale and NIHSS scores at hospital discharge, as well as in modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-2 and mortality at 6 months, between the two groups of patients. There were also no differences in intracranial hemorrhagic complications between both groups (13.9% for tenecteplase and 12.1% for alteplase).

Conclusions:

This is the first study on the topic in our setting. In line with recent international trials, our study did not show significant differences in clinical outcomes of patients treated with tenecteplase or alteplase. Tenecteplase could be a reasonable alternative to alteplase as thrombolytic therapy in ischemic stroke, with a good cost-benefit ratio and simpler implementation. Randomized studies with a larger number of patients are needed.

        · abstract in Spanish | Portuguese     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )