Endovascular thrombectomy for the treatment of ischemic stroke: An updated meta-analysis for a randomized controlled trial

To evaluate whether endovascular thrombectomy combined with intravenous thrombolysis is superior to the standard treatment of intravenous thrombolysis for the treatment of ischemic stroke.

A meta-analysis of 12 studies obtained by searching PubMed and Web of Science database was performed to determine whether the difference in mortality (within 7 days or 90 days), functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale, 0-2), hemorrhage (symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, and subarachnoid hemorrhage), and recurrent ischemic stroke rate at 90 days between patients who underwent mechanical intravenous thrombolysis with (intervention) and without (control) endovascular thrombectomy.

As compared with the control group, patients in the intervention group had lower 90-day mortality [summary risk ratio (RR) = 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.69-0.99; n = 1309/1070], higher recanalization rate (RR = 2.24, 95% CI: 1.97-2.56; n = 504/497), better functional outcome (modified Rankin score: 0-2; RR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.29-1.54; n = 1702/1502), and higher rate of subarachnoid hemorrhage (RR = 2.40, 95% CI: 1.45-3.99; n = 1046/875) without significant difference in the 7-day mortality (RR = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.84-1.50; n = 951/773), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (RR = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.82-1.54; n = 1707/1507), or recurrent ischemic stroke (RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.52-1.54; n = 718/506).

Our results demonstrated that patients in the intervention group had lower mortality and better functional outcomes than the control group. Although patients in the intervention group had a higher rate of subarachnoid hemorrhage; hence, endovascular thrombectomy combined with intravenous thrombolysis is still a beneficial intervention for a defined population of stroke patients.