Absolute and Relative Contraindications to IV rt-PA for Acute Ischemic Stroke

Jennifer E. Fugate, Alejandro Rabinstein

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

46 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Most of the contraindications to the administration of intravenous (IV) recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) originated as exclusion criteria in major stroke trials. These were derived from expert consensus for the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) trial. Despite the fact that the safety and efficacy of IV rtPA has been repeatedly confirmed in large international observational studies over the past 20 years, most patients with acute ischemic stroke disappointingly still do not receive thrombolytic treatment. Some of the original exclusion criteria have proven to be unnecessarily restrictive in real-world clinical practice. It has been suggested that application of relaxed exclusion criteria might increase the IV thrombolysis rate up to 20% with comparable outcomes to thrombolysis with more conventional criteria. We review the absolute and relative contraindications to IV rtPA for acute ischemic stroke, discussing the underlying rationale and evidence supporting these exclusion criteria.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)110-121
Number of pages12
JournalThe Neurohospitalist
Volume5
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015

Fingerprint

Tissue Plasminogen Activator
Stroke
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
Intravenous Administration
Observational Studies
Safety
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • acute stroke
  • contraindications
  • thrombolytic therapy
  • tissue plasminogen activator

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Absolute and Relative Contraindications to IV rt-PA for Acute Ischemic Stroke. / Fugate, Jennifer E.; Rabinstein, Alejandro.

In: The Neurohospitalist, Vol. 5, No. 3, 01.01.2015, p. 110-121.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{03ec2493d9144b378effa9712ee059c3,
title = "Absolute and Relative Contraindications to IV rt-PA for Acute Ischemic Stroke",
abstract = "Most of the contraindications to the administration of intravenous (IV) recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) originated as exclusion criteria in major stroke trials. These were derived from expert consensus for the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) trial. Despite the fact that the safety and efficacy of IV rtPA has been repeatedly confirmed in large international observational studies over the past 20 years, most patients with acute ischemic stroke disappointingly still do not receive thrombolytic treatment. Some of the original exclusion criteria have proven to be unnecessarily restrictive in real-world clinical practice. It has been suggested that application of relaxed exclusion criteria might increase the IV thrombolysis rate up to 20{\%} with comparable outcomes to thrombolysis with more conventional criteria. We review the absolute and relative contraindications to IV rtPA for acute ischemic stroke, discussing the underlying rationale and evidence supporting these exclusion criteria.",
keywords = "acute stroke, contraindications, thrombolytic therapy, tissue plasminogen activator",
author = "Fugate, {Jennifer E.} and Alejandro Rabinstein",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1941874415578532",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "5",
pages = "110--121",
journal = "The Neurohospitalist",
issn = "1941-8744",
publisher = "Sage Publications",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Absolute and Relative Contraindications to IV rt-PA for Acute Ischemic Stroke

AU - Fugate, Jennifer E.

AU - Rabinstein, Alejandro

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - Most of the contraindications to the administration of intravenous (IV) recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) originated as exclusion criteria in major stroke trials. These were derived from expert consensus for the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) trial. Despite the fact that the safety and efficacy of IV rtPA has been repeatedly confirmed in large international observational studies over the past 20 years, most patients with acute ischemic stroke disappointingly still do not receive thrombolytic treatment. Some of the original exclusion criteria have proven to be unnecessarily restrictive in real-world clinical practice. It has been suggested that application of relaxed exclusion criteria might increase the IV thrombolysis rate up to 20% with comparable outcomes to thrombolysis with more conventional criteria. We review the absolute and relative contraindications to IV rtPA for acute ischemic stroke, discussing the underlying rationale and evidence supporting these exclusion criteria.

AB - Most of the contraindications to the administration of intravenous (IV) recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) originated as exclusion criteria in major stroke trials. These were derived from expert consensus for the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) trial. Despite the fact that the safety and efficacy of IV rtPA has been repeatedly confirmed in large international observational studies over the past 20 years, most patients with acute ischemic stroke disappointingly still do not receive thrombolytic treatment. Some of the original exclusion criteria have proven to be unnecessarily restrictive in real-world clinical practice. It has been suggested that application of relaxed exclusion criteria might increase the IV thrombolysis rate up to 20% with comparable outcomes to thrombolysis with more conventional criteria. We review the absolute and relative contraindications to IV rtPA for acute ischemic stroke, discussing the underlying rationale and evidence supporting these exclusion criteria.

KW - acute stroke

KW - contraindications

KW - thrombolytic therapy

KW - tissue plasminogen activator

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84992884507&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84992884507&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1941874415578532

DO - 10.1177/1941874415578532

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:84992884507

VL - 5

SP - 110

EP - 121

JO - The Neurohospitalist

JF - The Neurohospitalist

SN - 1941-8744

IS - 3

ER -