RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests tenecteplase at an intravenous dose of 0.25 mg/kg is as safe and efficacious as intravenous alteplase standard dose and demonstrates a more favorable pharmacokinetic profile for treatment of acute ischemic stroke. OBJECTIVE: The purpose was to compare the safety and efficacy of alteplase versus tenecteplase for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke at a large community hospital health system following conversion in the preferred formulary thrombolytic. METHODS: Prior to converting, medication safety and operationalization analyses were conducted. A multicenter, retrospective medical record review was performed for patients who received alteplase 6 months prior to formulary thrombolytic conversion and for tenecteplase 6 months post-conversion for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. Primary outcomes included the rate of symptomatic intracranial and extracranial hemorrhage complications. Secondary outcomes included door-to-needle time, reduction in National Institute Health Stroke Scale at 24 hours and at discharge, order-to-administration time, and thrombolytic errors. The rates of hemorrhage were compared using binomial regression. RESULTS: Of the 287 patients reviewed, 115 received alteplase and 172 received tenecteplase. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhagic complications occurred in 1 patient (1%) who received alteplase compared with 3 patients (2%) who received tenecteplase (P = 0.9). There was no statistical difference in rates of symptomatic intracranial or extracranial hemorrhagic complications. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Conversion from alteplase to tenecteplase can be safely and effectively achieved at a large community hospital health system with differing levels of stroke certification. There were also additional cost savings and practical advantages including workflow benefits.