Bridging the Gap: Improving Acute Ischemic Stroke Outcomes with Intravenous Thrombolysis Prior to Mechanical Thrombectomy

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Manuscript explains well about "Improving acute ischemic stroke outcomes with intravenous thrombolysis prior to mechanical thrombectomy".

I have a few comments:

1. I believe that the number of relevant links in the Introduction section should be increased.

2. Trends should not be described unless statistically significant differences are found.

3. The power of the study needs to be calculated. The insufficient sample size that you describe as a “study limitation” needs to be justified.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study examined the efficacy and safety of using intravenous thrombolytic therapy prior to mechanical thrombectomy in patients with acute ischemic stroke, a highly relevant clinical issue. The results of the study may have an impact on current treatment guidelines and therefore have important clinical implications. However，I have some comments that would help clarify some points.

 

1. The authors used a variety of statistical methods to analyze the data, including linear and logistic regression analyses, which helped adjust for the effects of baseline variables. However, due to the small sample size, the results of these analyses may need to be interpreted with caution. It is recommended that the authors consider conducting sensitivity analyses or using other methods to validate their key findings (e.g., bootstrapping).

 

2. Differences in the effects of BT and d-MT in different patient subgroups (e.g., age, stroke severity, etc.) can be further explored in the Discussion section to provide more comprehensive information.

 

3. The discussion section provides a comprehensive discussion of the findings of the study and compares them with the existing literature. The authors also honestly discuss the limitations of the study. It is recommended that the authors further explore how their findings fit with current treatment guidelines and discuss directions for future research.

 

4. Abbreviations and terminology in articles should be given full names and explanations when they first appear, wherever possible, to improve the readability of the article.

 

5. Legend descriptions and text descriptions in Figure 2 should be consistent. Although BT means IVT+MT, it's better to use a uniform abbreviation for it.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is recommended for acceptance.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have answered all of the reviewer's questions and the quality of the article has improved.