4.2 Article

Intravenous Thrombolysis for Acute Ischemic Stroke in Patients with Thrombocytopenia

Journal

JOURNAL OF STROKE & CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASES
Volume 26, Issue 7, Pages 1414-1418

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2017.03.021

Keywords

IV rtPA; stroke; thrombocytopenia; ICH

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To determine the safety of intravenous (IV) recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) who had a platelet count <100,000 /mm(3). Methods: We reviewed the charts of all patients who received IV rtPA for AIS during a 9.6-year period at our stroke center. Those with platelets <100,000/mm(3) were identified. Head computed tomography scans performed in 24-36 hours postthrombolysis were reviewed to evaluate the rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Results: A total of 835 patients received IV rtPA for AIS during this period. A total of 5 patients were identified to have a platelet count <100,000/mm(3). One of them (20%) developed sICH post-IV tPA administration. The mean platelet count of those 5 patients was 63,000 +/- 19,000/mm(3). To the best of our knowledge, only 21 thrombocytopenic patients have been reported to receive IV rtPA for AIS in the medical literature. Combining our 5 cases with 21 patients previously reported, we have 26 AIS patients who had a platelet count <100,000/mm(3) and received IV rtPA, with 2 of them developing sICH (7.7 %). Comparing the rate of sICH among this group with the patients with normal platelet count in our cohort, there was no statistically significant difference (7.7% versus 6.04%, P value =.73). Conclusion: IV rtPA for AIS might be safe in patients with platelet count < 100,000/mm(3) and it is reasonable not to delay IV rtPA administration while waiting for the platelet count result, unless there is strong suspicion for abnormal platelet count. (C) 2017 National Stroke Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available