Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 18, 2026
Optimized Management of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke
Published on: January 18, 2018
Alteplase versus tenecteplase in acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion: a systematic review and
Mostafa Hossam El Din Moawad1,2, Ibrahim Serag3, Ahmed A Abo Elnaga3
1Alexandria Main University Hospital, Alexandria, Egypt.
Background:
Intravenous thrombolysis remains a cornerstone in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) management, particularly in large vessel occlusion (LVO). While alteplase has long been the standard thrombolytic agent, tenecteplase has emerged as a promising alternative due to its pharmacokinetic advantages. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare the efficacy and safety of tenecteplase versus alteplase in AIS patients with LVO.
Methods:
A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase until February 2025. Studies comparing tenecteplase and alteplase in AIS patients with LVO were included. The primary outcomes were functional independence at 3 months (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0-1 and 0-2), mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Secondary outcomes included any bleeding, adverse events, and overall complications. Pooled estimates were calculated using risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
Results:
A total of 14 studies (N = 9641 patients) were included, comprising 5898 patients receiving alteplase and 3743 receiving tenecteplase. No significant differences were observed in 3-month functional outcomes: mRS 0-1 (RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.1, P = 0.38) and mRS 0-2 (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.08, P = 0.44). Mortality rates were comparable between groups (OR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.88-1.30). No significant differences were found in intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) (OR = 1.25, 95% CI: 0.96-1.62), sICH (OR = 1.1, 95% CI: 0.91-1.33), or any bleeding (OR = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.9-1.57). The pooled OR for adverse events was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.53 to 1.17), indicating a comparable safety profile.
Conclusion:
This meta-analysis supports the non-inferiority of tenecteplase compared to alteplase in LVO-associated AIS regarding efficacy and safety. While tenecteplase offers practical advantages, including single-bolus administration and potentially lower costs, further large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings and optimize thrombolytic selection in stroke care.
