As shown in Fig. 2, rates of recanalization in the PROACT II study were quite similar to those obtained in the sonothrombolysis with TCCS and rtPA study. The PROACT II study randomized patients with MCA main stem or M2 branch occlusions within a 6-h time window for intra-arterial thrombolysis with pro-urokinase. The sonothrombolysis with TCCS and IV rtPA study randomized patients with proximal MCA main stem occlusions without residual flow (including patients with additional ipsilateral internal carotid artery occlusion) within a 3-h time window for 1 h of continuous insonation. As shown in Fig. 3, comparable

outcome results after 3 months (3–4 months in PROACT II) were obtained for the sonothrombolysis Selleckchem Talazoparib with TCCS and IV rtPA group and the pro-urokinase treatment group. The strong tendency toward a worse outcome for patients in the IV rtPA group without sonothrombolysis compared with those in the PROACT II control group may indicate that patients in the Lübeck randomized study may have been more severely affected than those in the PROACT II study. The lack of a temporal bone window is one main limitation of sonothrombolysis. Research studies have revealed that the frequency of an insufficient temporal sound

window for TCCS can vary from 8% [12] to 27% [13]. On the other hand, also the interventional therapy may not be applicable for all patients. A common limitation of interventional therapy is the lack of patency of the proximal carotid artery. 3-MA datasheet Data from the own register of MCA-M1 occlusions have revealed the presence of an additional proximal occlusion of the internal carotid artery in 23% of patients (unpublished data). A meta-analysis conducted by Tsivgoulis et al. [3] on sonothrombolysis with transcranial US (TCCS or TCD) included over 400 patients. They found that in comparison to patients with Astemizole rtPA treatment alone, patients who underwent sonothrombolysis had a 3 times higher chance for complete recanalization and a 2 times higher chance

for non-disability after 3 months. There was no evidence for increased risk of cerebral bleeding with US treatment. When the thrombolytic effect of “diagnostic” transcranial US was clinically observed for the first time, no experimental data on the effect of high-frequency, low-energy PW US on thrombolysis were available at the time. However, during the 1990s (after much time had passed since the first description of the thrombolytic effect of US in the late 1970s [14]), in vitro studies using high-frequency (1 MHz) and high-energy (spatial peak temporal average intensity [ISPTA] of 2 W/cm2) US demonstrated improved US-mediated binding of rtPA to fibrin, as well as reversible disintegration of fibrin without thrombolytics [15].