Is it Time to Reassess the SITS-MOST Criteria for Thrombolysis?

  • Rubiera M
  • Ribo M
  • Santamarina E
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background and Purpose— The Safe Implementation of Thrombolysis in Stroke-Monitoring Study (SITS-MOST) established guidelines to increase safety in acute stroke thrombolysis, but precluding treatment in an important proportion of patients. We aimed to assess safety/efficacy of thrombolysis in patients with SITS-MOST exclusion criteria. Methods— 369 nonlacunar tPA-treated patients were studied. Patients were classified as SITS-MOST (SM) or non–SITS-MOST (NSM) according to SITS-MOST–criteria fulfilling. Clinical evaluation was assessed by NIHSS and functional outcome by mRS at 3 months (functional independency=mRS ≤2). Results— Baseline NIHSS was 17. 169 (45.8%) patients were SM and 200 (54.1%) NSM. Recanalization (47.6%/50.3%, P =0.36), 24-hour-improvement (55.6%/49.5%, P =0.114), and SICH were similar (4.8%/5.1%, P =0.554). At discharge, clinical improvement in SM-group was higher (66.7%/55.7%, P =0.024). NSM tended to higher mortality (10.5%/16.1%, P =0.084) and lower functional independence (48.7%/39.6%, P =0.082). Conclusion— Thrombolysis may be safe in patients not fulfilling SITS-MOST criteria. Testing thrombolysis in patients outside SITS-MOST could be considered in the future.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rubiera, M., Ribo, M., Santamarina, E., Maisterra, O., Delgado-Mederos, R., Delgado, P., … Molina, C. A. (2009). Is it Time to Reassess the SITS-MOST Criteria for Thrombolysis? Stroke, 40(7), 2568–2571. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.108.538587

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free