Comparative Effectiveness of Intravenous Thrombolysis plus Mechanical Thrombectomy versus Mechanical Thrombectomy Alone in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: The treatment of acute ischemic stroke due to large artery vessel occlusion experienced a dramatic development within the last decade. This meta-analysis investigates the effectiveness of bridging therapy (BT) versus mechanical thrombectomy (MT) alone in treating acute ischemic stroke. Methods: Two independent reviewers assessed two-arm clinical trials from Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to January 2024. Data extraction and quality were evaluated using the ROBINS-2 tool. Our primary outcomes were improvement in NIHSS scores and 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score. Results: This meta-analysis, which included 2,638 participants from 8 randomized controlled trials, found that BT resulted in a greater improvement in NIHSS scores from baseline compared to endovascular treatment alone (mean difference [MD] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.73-1.20], p < 0.00001). Additionally, BT group achieved successful recanalization more frequently before and after thrombectomy. Thrombectomy alone hat a shorter time from stroke onset to groin puncture compared to BT (MD 9.91, 95% CI: [4.31-15.52], p = 0.005). Functional outcomes, mortality rates, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage rates, and long-term recovery metrics, such as Barthel index and modified Rankin Scale scores, were comparable between both treatment approaches. Conclusion: BT is superior to endovascular treatment alone based on NIHSS score improvement and successful reperfusion rates before and after thrombectomy. Despite MT alone demonstrating a shorter time from stroke onset to groin puncture (MD of 9.91 min), it did not contribute to greater NIHSS improvement at 24 h and 7 days. Further trials with larger sample sizes are warranted to enhance precision in clinical guidance.