Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

2 questions · 2 findings · 2 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 1 · 50%Moderate 0 · 0%High 1 · 50%

Intravenous thrombolytic treatment vs standard‐of‐care therapy

Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage at · people with stroke upon awakening

Intravenous thrombolytic treatment showed no clear difference in symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage at compared with standard medical care (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intravenous thrombolytic treatment and endovascular thrombectomy for ischaemic wake‐up stroke 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 3.47 [0.98, 12.26]
4 studies · 754 participants
High

Percutaneous vascular interventions vs intravenous thrombolytic treatment

Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage at

Percutaneous vascular interventions showed no clear difference in symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage within first 14 days compared with intravenous thrombolytic treatment (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Percutaneous vascular interventions versus intravenous thrombolytic treatment for acute ischaemic stroke 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.99 [0.5, 1.95]
4 studies · 450 participants
Low