Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 14, 2026

Prehospital Thrombolysis: A Manual from Berlin
Published on: November 26, 2013
Debunking 7 myths that hamper the realization of randomized controlled trials on intra-arterial thrombolysis for
Alfonso Ciccone1, Luca Valvassori, Roberto Gasparotti
1Stroke Unit and Department of Neurology, Niguarda Ca' Granda Hospital, Milan, Italy. Alfonso.Ciccone@ospedaleniguarda.it
Insights
Intra-arterial (IA) thrombolysis for ischemic stroke is common but lacks strong evidence. Current beliefs about its superiority over intravenous (IV) thrombolysis are often myths, hindering informed treatment decisions.
Area of Science:
- Neurology
- Interventional Neuroradiology
- Emergency Medicine
Background:
- Intravenous (IV) thrombolysis is the standard for ischemic stroke within 3 hours.
- Intra-arterial (IA) thrombolysis has been used for over 25 years, but evidence supporting its superiority is limited.
- Clinical decisions regarding IA thrombolysis are often based on beliefs rather than robust data.
Purpose of the Study:
- To analyze the beliefs and myths surrounding patient selection for IA thrombolysis.
- To critically evaluate the perceived advantages of IA thrombolysis over IV thrombolysis.
Main Methods:
- Review and debunk common myths regarding IA thrombolysis efficacy and patient selection.
- Examined beliefs about higher recanalization rates, effectiveness beyond the 3-hour window, and use in specific stroke types (vertebrobasilar).
- Assessed myths related to diagnostic screening methods (Doppler, CTA, MRA, MRI) and its role as rescue therapy.
Main Results:
- Identified and debunked seven common myths about IA thrombolysis.
- Found that evidence supporting IA thrombolysis superiority over IV is scant.
- Highlighted that efficacy is often mythologized and not dependent on specific agents or devices.
Conclusions:
- There is a lack of robust evidence for IA thrombolysis in acute stroke management.
- Clinicians and patients lack sufficient information for informed treatment choices.
- Randomized controlled trials are needed to resolve uncertainties; current case series have perpetuated myths.
Background And Purpose:
Although intravenous (IV) thrombolysis is the standard treatment for patients with ischemic stroke occurring within 3 hours from symptom onset, a few interventional neuroradiologists have been treating this category of patients by an intra-arterial (IA) route for >25 years. However, evidence is still required to support the clinical feeling that IA treatment, which needs longer time and greater complexity, leads to a better outcome. Therefore, the objective of the present review was to analyze beliefs and myths underlying the selection of patients for IA thrombolysis.
Methods:
We identified and debunked the following myths on IA thrombolysis: (1) IA thrombolysis works better than IV because it achieves higher recanalization rates; (2) IA thrombolysis works better than IV after the 3-hour window; (3) IA thrombolysis works better than IV in vertebrobasilar stroke; (4) carotid duplex, transcranial doppler, CT angiography, or MRA should be used to screen for major vessel occlusion treatable with IA thrombolysis; (5) to be treated with IA thrombolysis, patients should be selected with diffusion/perfusion MRI; (6) IA thrombolysis should be used as a "rescue" therapy for IV thrombolysis; and (7) the efficacy of IA thrombolysis depends on the thrombolytic agent or the device used.
Conclusions:
Evidence on acute stroke management with IA thrombolysis is scant. Therefore, neither clinicians nor patients have enough information to make truly informed decisions about the most appropriate treatment. Only randomized controlled trials can clear uncertainties about the possible superiority of IA over IV thrombolysis. Regretfully, case series on IA treatment have limited the organization of such trials and have only favored the spread of myths.
Related Concept Videos
Ischemic Stroke l: Introduction
Ischemic Stroke ll: Pathophysiology
Venous Thrombosis III: Interprofessional Care
Stroke: Introduction and Types

