Emergency Medicine Literature of Note: The tPA Cochrane Review Takes Us For Fools

  Posted by Ryan Radecki It’s been 5 years since the last Cochrane Review synthesizing the evidence regarding tPA in acute ischemic stroke.  Clearly, given such a time span, in an area of active clinical controversy, a great deal of new, important, randomized evidence has been generated!Or, sadly, the only new evidence available to inform practice is IST-3 – a study failing to demonstrate benefit, despite its pro-tPA flaws and biases.  So, it ought not be a very exciting update, considering the 2009 version included 26 trials, and the 2014 update now includes only 27 trials.  Their summary conclusion, with only additional evidence of regression to the mean, ought remain essentially the same, or even less optimistic, right? Of course not: via Emergency Medicine Literature of Note: The tPA Cochrane Review Takes Us For Fools. Read, and enjoy. Excellent analysis. Related posts: What the Tamiflu saga tells us about drug trials and big pharma | Business | The Guardian Hint: Roche stinks, and the Cochrane Collaboration has done all... Obamacare Is the Worst-Case Scenario | National Review Online I’m not usually up this early. Ate a lot of... All Trials | All Trials Registered. All Results Reported Many thanks to Steve in the comments on the last... YARPP powered by AdBistroPowered by
Source: GruntDoc - Category: Emergency Medicine Authors: Tags: Emergency Source Type: blogs