• Medicine · Jan 2021

    Effect of thrombolysis in a mobile stroke unit versus in hospital for patients with ischemic stroke: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

    • Jieyun Chen, Xiaoying Lin, Risheng Huang, Minyuan Luo, Yali Cai, and Wenxiao Zou.
    • Department of Radiology, Quanzhou First Hospital Affiliated to Fujian Medical University, Quanzhou, Fujian.
    • Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 Jan 8; 100 (1): e23676e23676.

    IntroductionIschemic stroke caused by arterial occlusion is the cause of most strokes. The focus of treatment is rapid reperfusion through intravenous thrombolysis and intravascular thrombectomy. Two acute stroke management including prehospital thrombolysis and in hospital have been widely used clinically to treat ischemic stroke with satisfied efficacy. However, there is no systematic review comparing the effectiveness of these 2 therapies. The aim of this study is to compare the effect of prehospital thrombolysis versus in hospital for patients with ischemic stroke.Methods And AnalysisThe following electronic databases will be searched: Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Biology Medicine disc (CBM), Wanfang Database, and Chinese Scientific Journal Database.The randomized controlled trials of prehospital thrombolysis versus in hospital for ischemic stroke will be searched in the databases from their inception to December 2020 by 2 researchers independently. Onset to therapy (OTT) duration and National Institute Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores will be assessed as the primary outcomes; safety assessment including intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and mortality will be assessed as the secondary outcomes. The Review Manager 5.3 will be used for meta-analysis and the evidence level will be assessed by using the method for Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and evaluation Continuous outcomes will be presented as the weighted mean difference or standardized mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI), whereas dichotomous data will be expressed as relative risk with 95% CI. If heterogeneity existed (P < .05), the random effect model was used. Otherwise, we will use the fixed effect model for calculation.Ethics And DisseminationEthical approval is not required because no primary data are collected. This review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Prospero Registration NumberCRD42020200708.Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.