Abstract
Background:
Recent evidence suggests tenecteplase at an intravenous dose of 0.25 mg/kg is as safe and efficacious as intravenous alteplase standard dose and demonstrates a more favorable pharmacokinetic profile for treatment of acute ischemic stroke.
Objective:
The purpose was to compare the safety and efficacy of alteplase versus tenecteplase for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke at a large community hospital health system following conversion in the preferred formulary thrombolytic.
Methods:
Prior to converting, medication safety and operationalization analyses were conducted. A multicenter, retrospective medical record review was performed for patients who received alteplase 6 months prior to formulary thrombolytic conversion and for tenecteplase 6 months post-conversion for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Primary outcomes included the rate of symptomatic intracranial and extracranial hemorrhage complications. Secondary outcomes included door-to-needle time, reduction in National Institute Health Stroke Scale at 24 hours and at discharge, order-to-administration time, and thrombolytic errors. The rates of hemorrhage were compared using binomial regression.
Results:
Of the 287 patients reviewed, 115 received alteplase and 172 received tenecteplase. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhagic complications occurred in 1 patient (1%) who received alteplase compared with 3 patients (2%) who received tenecteplase (P = 0.9). There was no statistical difference in rates of symptomatic intracranial or extracranial hemorrhagic complications.
Conclusion and Relevance:
Conversion from alteplase to tenecteplase can be safely and effectively achieved at a large community hospital health system with differing levels of stroke certification. There were also additional cost savings and practical advantages including workflow benefits.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.