Abstract WP179: Differences in door-to-needle times with centralized preparation of alteplase and tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke

Purpose: Conflicting information exists regarding the clinical and operational impact of transitioning from alteplase to tenecteplase for treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Furthermore, most studies focus on door-to-needle (DTN) time, and limited information investigates the effect on pharmacy-specific metrics. This study assessed the potential impact of the transition from alteplase to tenecteplase for the management of AIS on DTN time, order verification, preparation, and delivery times when prepared in a centralized pharmacy. Methods: In this single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study, we analyzed a local registry of patients treated for AIS at a Primary Stroke Center. Patients treated with alteplase from December 1, 2020, to November 30, 2022, were compared to patients treated with tenecteplase from December 1, 2022, to November 30, 2024, following an institution-wide formulary switch for AIS. The primary outcome was DTN time. Secondary outcomes included order-to-verification time, verification-to-preparation time, preparation-to-hang time, and order-to-hang time. Safety outcomes included incidence of bleeding and all-cause mortality. Results: A total of 171 patients were treated in the alteplase (n=97) and tenecteplase (n=74) groups. Median (IQR) DTN time was 59 (46-75) minutes in the alteplase group and 52 (42-74) minutes in the tenecteplase group [p=0.259]. No differences were found between alteplase and tenecteplase groups in order-to-verification (2 vs. 2 min; p=0.525), order-to-preparation (7 vs. 7 min; p=0.212), or order-to-administration times (12 vs. 12 min; p=0.687). Conclusion: When dispensed from a centralized pharmacy, formulary transition from alteplase to tenecteplase for AIS was not associated with significant differences in DTN times or pharmacy-specific metrics. Centralized dispensing remains a viable strategy for efficient treatment of ischemic stroke. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of the transition from centralized dispensing to bedside preparation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Stroke
Published
2026-01-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/str.57.suppl_1.wp179
Primary Topic
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract WP179: Differences in door-to-needle times with centralized preparation of alteplase and tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke

Andrew C. Lodolo, Michele Glidden, Abbie McNew, Mary E. Blair et al.
Stroke
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
article

Abstract WP179: Differences in door-to-needle times with centralized preparation of alteplase and tenecteplase for acute ischemic stroke

Andrew C. Lodolo, Michele Glidden, Abbie McNew, Mary E. Blair, Allison N Boyd, Todd A. Walroth, Danika Smith, Taylor Rhew, Nolan Walton, lauren kennedy
article en

Abstract

Purpose: Conflicting information exists regarding the clinical and operational impact of transitioning from alteplase to tenecteplase for treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Furthermore, most studies focus on door-to-needle (DTN) time, and limited information investigates the effect on pharmacy-specific metrics. This study assessed the potential impact of the transition from alteplase to tenecteplase for the management of AIS on DTN time, order verification, preparation, and delivery times when prepared in a centralized pharmacy. Methods: In this single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study, we analyzed a local registry of patients treated for AIS at a Primary Stroke Center. Patients treated with alteplase from December 1, 2020, to November 30, 2022, were compared to patients treated with tenecteplase from December 1, 2022, to November 30, 2024, following an institution-wide formulary switch for AIS. The primary outcome was DTN time. Secondary outcomes included order-to-verification time, verification-to-preparation time, preparation-to-hang time, and order-to-hang time. Safety outcomes included incidence of bleeding and all-cause mortality. Results: A total of 171 patients were treated in the alteplase (n=97) and tenecteplase (n=74) groups. Median (IQR) DTN time was 59 (46-75) minutes in the alteplase group and 52 (42-74) minutes in the tenecteplase group [p=0.259]. No differences were found between alteplase and tenecteplase groups in order-to-verification (2 vs. 2 min; p=0.525), order-to-preparation (7 vs. 7 min; p=0.212), or order-to-administration times (12 vs. 12 min; p=0.687). Conclusion: When dispensed from a centralized pharmacy, formulary transition from alteplase to tenecteplase for AIS was not associated with significant differences in DTN times or pharmacy-specific metrics. Centralized dispensing remains a viable strategy for efficient treatment of ischemic stroke. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of the transition from centralized dispensing to bedside preparation.

StrokeVol. 57(Suppl_1)
Barnes-Jewish Hospital (US), Eskenazi Health Foundation (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.