[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.161.216.242. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Citations 0
Letters
January 26, 2005

Thrombolysis for Acute Stroke

JAMA. 2005;293(4):421-422. doi:10.1001/jama.293.4.421-c

To the Editor: I am concerned about the conclusions of the Editorial by Dr Caplan1 that accompanied 2 studies on the use of thrombolytic therapy for acute stroke. The first article2 reported a mortality rate of 10% among 1658 patients during the initial hospitalization, and 27.2% of patients had one or more serious complications. The second article3 reported that 111 (51.4%) of 216 patients who were treated with alteplase had a lack of improvement at 24 hours, 43 patients (20%) had died at 3 months, and 75 (44%) of 170 survivors had poor outcomes. The Editorial, although cautious, concluded that more patients should be given thrombolytic treatment, and that there is an urgent need to transport patients to stroke centers more quickly. There is no suggestion that a moratorium be placed on lytic therapy for acute stroke in community hospitals, which is a conclusion that could have been drawn from these studies. By protocol, thrombolytic therapy is to be initiated within 3 hours, but the physician making a treatment decision in such patients cannot clinically tell whether the patient is having a transient ischemic attack or a reversible ischemic neurological deficit rather than a stroke with symptoms persisting beyond 1 to 7 days. It may be that some of these patients would be better off if given an aspirin and left alone for 24 hours. Complications associated with a disease may be more acceptable to patients and families than complications associated with treatment.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×