Safety and efficacy of tirofiban combined with endovascular treatment in acute ischaemic stroke

The efficacy and safety of continuous intravenous tirofiban for acute ischemic stroke patients treated by endovascular therapy: a meta-analysis

Introduction

Tirofiban is a non-peptide selective glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitor with a short half-life. The research assesses the efficacy and safety of continuous intravenous tirofiban in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) undergoing endovascular therapy (ET).

Methods

A systematic search of Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases is conducted from inception until January 26, 2024. Eligible studies are included based on predefined selection criteria. Efficacy outcomes (favorable functional outcome and excellent functional outcome) and safety outcomes (symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage [sICH], any intracranial hemorrhage [ICH], and 90-day mortality) are calculated using odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

A total of 4,329 patients from 15 studies are included in the analysis. The results indicate a significant trend toward favorable functional outcomes in the tirofiban group (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.09-1.42; p = 0.001). In terms of safety outcomes, tirofiban does not increase the risk of sICH (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.71-1.13; p = 0.35) or any ICH (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.70-1.34; p = 0.85), but it significantly decreases 90-day mortality (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.64-0.88; p = 0.0006). A subgroup analysis suggests that continuous intravenous tirofiban demonstrates better efficacy (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.09-1.42; p = 0.001) for patients with AIS undergoing rescue ET with even better results when used in combination with intra-arterial and intravenous administration (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.07-1.451; p = 0.005).

Conclusion

Continuous intravenous tirofiban is effective and safe for patients with AIS undergoing rescue ET, particularly when combined with intra-arterial tirofiban.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO, identifier CRD42023385695.

Statistical analysis plan for the multicenter, open, randomized controlled clinical trial to assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous tirofiban vs aspirin in acute ischemic stroke due to tandem lesion, undergoing recanalization therapy by endovascular treatment (ATILA trial)

RATIONALE

In-stent reocclusion after endovascular therapy has a negative impact on outcomes in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to tandem lesions (TL). Optimal antiplatelet therapy approach in these patients to avoid in-stent reocclusion is yet to be elucidated.

AIMS

To assess efficacy and safety of intravenous tirofiban versus intravenous aspirin in patients undergoing MT plus carotid stenting in the setting of AIS due to TL.

SAMPLE SIZE ESTIMATES

Two hundred forty patients will be enrolled, 120 in every treatment arm.

METHODS AND DESIGN

A multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled (aspirin group), assessor-blinded clinical trial will be conducted. Patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be randomized at MT onset to the experimental or control group (1:1). Intravenous aspirin will be administered at a 500-mg single dose and tirofiban at a 500-mcg bolus followed by a 200-mcg/h infusion during the first 24 h. All patients will be followed for up to 3 months.

STUDY OUTCOMES

Primary efficacy outcome will be the proportion of patients with carotid in-stent thrombosis within the first 24 h after MT. Primary safety outcome will be the rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage.

DISCUSSION

This will be the first clinical trial to assess the best antiplatelet therapy to avoid in-stent thrombosis after MT in patients with TL.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered as NCT05225961. February, 7th, 2022.

Subtyping treatment response of tirofiban in acute ischemic stroke based on neuroimaging features

In a previously published clinical trial, we demonstrated that tirofiban was effective and safe in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients who did not undergo early recanalization treatments. We aimed to evaluate neuroimaging characteristics and their clinical significance to guide tirofiban treatment. In this post hoc analysis, location of infarcts (anterior circulation stroke [ACS] vs. posterior circulation stroke [PCS]), degree of cerebral artery stenosis (≤69% vs. ≥70% or occlusion), total infarct volume, and ASPECTS were used to predict the treatment effects of tirofiban, defined as the proportions of excellent and favorable functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score of 0-1, 0-2) at 90 days. ACS patients were more likely to achieve excellent (OR 2.08; 95% CI 1.25-3.45; p = 0.004) and favorable functional outcome (OR 2.28; 95% CI 1.24-4.22; p = 0.008) when treated with tirofiban. However, there was no significant difference in PCS patients between tirofiban and the control group. For patients with severe stenosis (≥70% or occlusion), tirofiban treatment improved the proportion of good outcomes (OR 2.84; 95% CI 1.44-5.60; p = 0.002 for mRS 0-1; OR 2.42; 95% CI 1.22-4.77; p = 0.011 for mRS 0-2). Meanwhile, we found that tirofiban improved outcome in patients with ASPECTS 8-10 and was independent of total infarct volume. These findings support the hypothesis that patients with ACS and severe stenosis may be recommended for tirofiban treatment, which can be predicted independent of total infarct volume.

Efficacy and safety of tirofiban in patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with endovascular thrombectomy: A frequentist and Bayesian meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Tirofiban is an antiplatelet treatment approved for acute coronary syndrome, but it has not been rigorously evaluated for efficacy and safety in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) treated with endovascular thrombectomy (EVT).

METHODS

Electronic databases were systematically searched for studies conducted from January 1, 2015, to July 31, 2021, that evaluated tirofiban administration for patients with AIS treated with EVT in comparison with control. Risk ratios (RRs) and confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for favorable functional outcomes (FFOs), mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH), each 90 days after AIS. Bayesian hierarchical modeling was performed to obtain posterior RR and its 95% highest posterior density (HPD) for validation.

RESULTS

Compared with controls, tirofiban users exhibited increased FFOs (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.08-1.30), decreased mortality (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64-0.92), and no difference in SICH (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.77-1.23). Tirofiban users in the postbolus infusion subgroup exhibited increased FFOs (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.07-1.35), decreased mortality (RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.88), and no increase in SICH (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.72-1.29). The bolus-only subgroup showed no differences in FFO, mortality, or SICH between the tirofiban and control groups. Consistent results were obtained for posterior density of FFO (posterior RR, 1.20; 95% HPD, 1.06-1.34), mortality (posterior RR, 0.77; 95% HPD, 0.63-0.92), and SICH (posterior RR, 0.98; 95% HPD, 0.71-1.26).

CONCLUSION

For patients with AIS treated with EVT, tirofiban improved FFOs, decreased mortality, and did not increase SICH compared with controls; postbolus infusion for administering tirofiban was more favored than the bolus-only regimen.

Low dose intravenous cangrelor versus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in endovascular treatment of tandem lesions

OBJECTIVES

Intravenous (IV) periprocedural antiplatelet therapy (APT) for patients undergoing acute carotid stenting during mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is not fully investigated. We aimed to compare the safety profile of IV low dose cangrelor versus IV glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (GP-IIb/IIIa) inhibitors in patients with acute tandem lesions (TLs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively identified all cases of periprocedural administration of IV cangrelor or GP-IIb/IIIa inhibitors during acute TLs intervention from a multicenter collaboration. Patients were divided in two groups according to the IV APT regimen at the time of MT procedure: 1) cangrelor and 2) GP-IIb/IIIa inhibitors (tirofiban and eptifibatide). Safety outcomes included rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), parenchymal hematoma type 1 and 2 (PH1-PH2), and hemorrhagic infarction type 1 and 2 (HI1-HI2).

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients received IV APT during MT, 30 were in the cangrelor group, and 33 were in the GP-IIb/IIIa inhibitors group. There were no significant differences in the rates of sICH (3.3% vs. 12.1%, aOR=0.21, 95%CI 0.02-2.18, p=0.229), HI1-HI2 (21.4% vs 42.4%, aOR=0.21, 95%CI 0.02-2.18, p=0.229), and PH1-PH2 (17.9% vs. 12.1%, aOR=1.63, 95%CI 0.29-9.83, p=0.577) between both treatment groups. However, there was a trend toward reduced hemorrhage rates with cangrelor. Cangrelor was associated with increased odds of complete reperfusion (aOR=5.86; 95%CI 1.57-26.62;p=0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective non-randomized cohort study, our findings suggest that low dose cangrelor has similar safety and increased rate of complete reperfusion compared to IV GP-IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm this association.

Safety and efficacy of tirofiban in the management of stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

About 30 % of stroke patients have experienced unsuccessful reperfusion following endovascular therapy. Mechanical thrombectomy instruments may contribute to this by stimulating platelet aggregation. Tirofiban is a selective and rapidly activated antagonist of the platelets nonpeptide glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptors that can reversibly suppress platelet aggregation. But, data from the medical literature are conflicting regarding its safety and efficacy for stroke patients. Hence, this study was designed to assess the safety and efficacy of tirofiban in stroke patients.

METHODS

Five major databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane library) were searched till December 2022. The Cochrane tool was used for risk of bias assessment, and the RevMan 5.4 was utilized for data analysis.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs with 2088 stroke patients were included. Tirofiban significantly increased the number of patients with mRS 0 score after 90 days than control; RR= 1.39, 95 %CI [1.15, 1.69]; p = 0.0006. Additionally, it reduced the NIHSS score after seven days; MD= -0.60, 95 %CI [-1.14, -0.06]; p = 0.03. However, tirofiban increased the incidence of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH); RR= 1.22, 95 %CI [1.03, 1.44]; p = 0.02. Other assessed outcomes showed insignificant results.

CONCLUSIONS

Tirofiban was associated with a higher mRS 0 score after three months and a lower NIHSS score after seven days. However, it is associated with higher ICH. Multicentric trials are required to provide more convincing proof of its utility.

Association between intravenous tirofiban and intracranial hemorrhage in acute large vessel occlusion stroke: insight from the RESCUE BT randomized placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to investigate the association between intravenous tirofiban and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) secondary to large vessel occlusion (LVO) receiving endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) within 24 h of time last known well (LKW).

METHODS

Patients with AIS-LVO who were randomly assigned to receive intravenous tirofiban or placebo before EVT within 24 h of time LKW and had follow-up brain non-contrast computed tomography within 24 h after stopping tirofiban treatment were derived from "RESCUE BT": a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. All eligible patients were divided into SICH and NO-SICH groups. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore for heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Of 945 patients included in this cohort, there were 76 (8.0%) in the SICH group and 869 (92.0%) in the NO-SICH group. The incidence of SICH was not higher in patients receiving intravenous tirofiban compared with placebo (adjusted risk ratio (RR), 1.51; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.97-2.36; P = 0.07). Subgroup analyses showed that age greater than 67-year-old (adjusted RR, 2.18; 95% CI 1.18-4.00), NIHSS greater than 16 (adjusted RR, 1.88; 95% CI 1.06-3.34), and cardioembolism (adjusted RR, 3.73; 95% CI 1.66-8.35) were associated with increased SICH risk.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute large vessel occlusion stroke, intravenous tirofiban before EVT within 24 h of time from last known well is not associated with increased risk of SICH. Patients who are older, have more severe neurological deficits, or with cardioembolism are at higher risk of SICH with intravenous tirofiban.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

URL: http://www.chictr.org.cn ; Unique identifier: ChiCTR-INR-17014167.

Meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of tirofiban in patients with acute ischaemic stroke undergoing mechanical thrombectomy

INTRODUCTION

Mechanical thrombectomy is now widely used in acute ischaemic stroke, but its adjunctive antiplatelet aggregation regimen is controversial. This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of tirofiban in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) who underwent mechanical thrombectomy.

METHODS

We systematically searched Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of science. Randomized controlled studies and cohort studies comparing the tirofiban group and non-tirofiban group (control group) in patients with AIS who underwent mechanical thrombectomy. The primary safety outcomes were symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), 3-month mortality, and re-occlusion rate. The primary efficacy outcomes were good functional outcome (mRS 0-2), excellent functional outcome (mRS 0-1), and successful recanalization (mTICI≥2b).

RESULTS

We included 22 studies with a total of 6062 patients. For safety outcomes, the tirofiban group had a non-significantly higher rate of sICH (OR = 0.90, 95 % CI = 0.73-1.10, P = 0.29) and a significantly lower rate of re-occlusion (OR = 0.40, 95 % CI = 0.19-0.82, P = 0.01) and 3-month mortality (OR = 0.71, 95 % CI = 0.61-0.82, P < 0.00001) compared to the control group. In terms of efficacy outcomes, significant improvement in good functional outcomes (mRS 0-2) (OR = 1.24, 95 % CI = 1.11-1.39, P = 0.0002) and recanalization rate (OR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.17-1.62, P = 0.0001) compared to tirofiban, but not significant improvement in excellent functional outcomes(OR = 1.14, 95 % CI = 0.93-1.39, P = 0.21). In addition, compared with cardiogenic stroke, the large atherosclerotic stroke had a higher rate of good functional outcome (OR = 1.58, 95 % CI = 1.18-2.11, P = 0.002) and a lower rate of 3-month mortality (OR = 0.58, 95 % CI = 0.39-0.85, P = 0.005). Subgroup analysis by route of administration showed a significant improvement in good functional outcome in the intravenous group (OR = 1.27, 95 % CI = 1.08-1.50, P = 0.004), while no significant difference was found between the arterial and arteriovenous groups.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with tirofiban in patients with AIS with mechanical thrombectomy is effective in improving functional prognosis, arterial recanalization rates, and reducing 3-month mortality and re-occlusion rates, particularly in patients with large atherosclerotic stroke, without increasing the rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Intravenous administration of tirofiban significantly improves the clinical prognosis compared to arterial administration. Tirofiban is effective and safe in patients with AIS.

Anaesthetic and peri-operative management for thrombectomy procedures in stroke patients

PURPOSE

To provide recommendations for the anaesthetic and peri-operative management for thrombectomy procedure in stroke patients DESIGN: A consensus committee of 15 experts issued from the French Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine (Société Française d'Anesthésie et Réanimation, SFAR), the Association of French-language Neuro-Anaesthetists (Association des Neuro-Anesthésistes Réanimateurs de Langue Francaise, ANARLF), the French Neuro-Vascular Society (Société Francaise de Neuro-Vasculaire, SFNV), the French Neuro-Radiology Society (Société Francaise de Neuro-Radiologie, SFNR) and the French Study Group on Haemostasis and Thrombosis (Groupe Français d'Études sur l'Hémostase et la Thrombose, GFHT) was convened, under the supervision of two expert coordinators from the SFAR and the ANARLF. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the outset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guideline elaboration process was conducted independently of any industry funding. The authors were required to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide their assessment of quality of evidence.

METHODS

Four fields were defined prior to the literature search: (1) Peri-procedural management, (2) Prevention and management of secondary brain injuries, (3) Management of antiplatelet and anticoagulant treatments, (4) Post-procedural management and orientation of the patient. Questions were formulated using the PICO format (Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes) and updated as needed. Analysis of the literature was then conducted and the recommendations were formulated according to the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

The SFAR/ANARLF/SFNV/SFNR/GFHT guideline panel drew up 18 recommendations regarding anaesthetic management of mechanical thrombectomy procedures. Due to a lack of data in the literature allowing to conclude with high certainty on relevant clinical outcomes, the experts decided to formulate these guidelines as "Professional Practice Recommendations" (PPR) rather than "Formalized Expert Recommendations". After two rounds of rating and several amendments, a strong agreement was reached on 100% of the recommendations. No recommendation could be formulated for two questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong agreement among experts was reached to provide a sizable number of recommendations aimed at optimising anaesthetic management for thrombectomy in patients suffering from stroke.

Tirofiban for Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Receiving Intravenous Thrombolysis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Tirofiban has been used as a rescue when thrombectomy is not successful in endovascular therapy (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS), but the use of tirofiban after intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) is controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tirofiban combined with IVT in AIS compared with not receiving tirofiban.

METHODS

The PubMed and Embase databases were searched for all relevant studies published up to August 31, 2021. The safety endpoints included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and mortality. The efficacy endpoint was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at the 3-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Seven articles (1,036 patients) were included. Of these, 444 patients received tirofiban, and 592 patients did not. Meta-analysis showed that tirofiban did not increase the risk of sICH (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.50-1.93; p = 0.96), any ICH (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.63-1.39; p = 0.75) or mortality (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.39-1.15; p = 0.15) and tended to be associated with a favorable functional outcome (OR 1.33; 95% CI 0.99-1.78; p = 0.06) in patients with AIS. Subgroup analysis showed that bridging therapy combined with tirofiban could reduce mortality (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.23-0.98; p = 0.04). Tirofiban significantly improved the favorable functional outcome in patients with IVT only (non-EVT) (OR 1.98; 95% CI 1.30-3.02; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Intravenous tirofiban could be safe for patients with AIS undergoing IVT, regardless of receiving EVT. Intravenous tirofiban may reduce mortality rates for patients undergoing bridging therapy. It also could increase the likelihood of a favorable functional outcome, especially for patients receiving IVT only.

Safety and efficacy of tirofiban in acute ischemic stroke due to tandem lesions undergoing mechanical thrombectomy: A multicenter randomized clinical trial (ATILA) protocol

Background:

In-stent thrombosis after mechanical thrombectomy (MT) worsen outcomes in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to tandem lesions (TL). Although an optimal antiplatelet therapy is needed, the best approach to avoid in-stent thrombosis is yet to be elucidated.

Hypothesis:

Low-dose intravenous tirofiban is superior to intravenous aspirin in avoiding in-stent thrombosis in patients undergoing MT plus carotid stenting in the setting of AIS due to TL.

Methods:

The ATILA-trial is a multicenter, prospective, phase IV, randomized, controlled (aspirin group as control), assessor-blinded clinical trial. Patients fulfilling inclusion criteria (AIS due to TL, ASPECTS ⩾ 6, pre-stroke modified Rankin Scale ⩽2 and onset <24 h) will be randomized (1:1) at MT onset to experimental (intravenous tirofiban) or control group (intravenous aspirin). Intravenous aspirin will be administered at a 500 mg single dose and tirofiban at a 500 µg bolus followed by a 200 µg/h infusion during first 22 h. All patients will be followed up to 3 months. Sample size estimated is 240 patients.

Outcomes:

The primary efficacy outcome is the proportion of patients with carotid in-stent thrombosis within the first 24 h after MT. The primary safety outcome is the rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Secondary outcomes include functional independence defined as modified Rankin Scale 0–2, proportion of patients undergoing rescue therapy due to in-stent aggregation during MT and carotid reocclusion at 30 days.

Discussion:

ATILA-trial will be the first clinical trial regarding the best antiplatelet therapy to avoid in-stent thrombosis after MT in patients with TL.

Trial registration:

NCT0522596.

Influence of tirofiban on stroke outcome after mechanical thrombectomy in acute vertebrobasilar artery occlusion

BACKGROUND

Even undergoing mechanical thrombectomy (MT), patients with acute vertebrobasilar artery occlusion (AVBAO) still have a high rate of mortality. Tirofiban is a novel antiplatelet agent which is now widely empirically used in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). In this study, we aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tirofiban as adjunctive therapy for MT in AVBAO.

METHODS

From October 2016 to July 2021, consecutive AVBAO patients receiving MT were included in the prospective stroke registry. The short-term outcomes were (1) symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH); (2) in-hospital death; (3) National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) at discharge. The Long-term outcomes were: (1) modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 3 months; (2) death at 3 months.

RESULTS

A total of 130 eligible patients were included in the study, 64 (49.2%) patients received tirofiban. In multivariate regression analysis, no significant differences were observed in all outcomes between the tirofiban and non-tirofiban group [sICH (adjusted OR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.12-7.82, p = 0.97), in-hospital death (adjusted OR 0.57; 95% CI, 0.17-1.89, p = 0.36), NIHSS at discharge (95% CI, -2.14-8.63, p = 0.24), mRS (adjusted OR 1.20; 95% CI, 0.40-3.62, p = 0.75), and death at 3 months (adjusted OR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.24-2.90, p = 0.77)].

CONCLUSIONS

In AVBAO, tirofiban adjunctive to MT was not associated with an increased risk of sICH. Short-term (in-hospital death, NIHSS at discharge) and long-term outcomes (mRS and death at 3 months) seem not to be influenced by tirofiban use.

Association of Intravenous Tirofiban with Functional Outcomes in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients with Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion Receiving Endovascular Thrombectomy

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that intravenous tirofiban improves functional outcomes without promoting the risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in stroke secondary to basilar artery occlusion (BAO) receiving endovascular thrombectomy.

METHODS

Patients with acute BAO stroke who were treated with endovascular thrombectomy and had tirofiban treatment information were derived from "BASILAR": a nationwide, prospective registry. All eligible patients were divided into tirofiban and no-tirofiban groups according to whether tirofiban was used intravenously. The primary endpoint was the 90-day severity of disability as assessed by the modified Rankin scale score. Safety outcomes were the frequency of ICH and mortality.

RESULTS

Of 645 patients included in this cohort, 363 were in the tirofiban group and 282 were in the no-tirofiban group. Thrombectomy with intravenous tirofiban reduced the 90-day disability level over the range of the modified Rankin scale (adjusted common odds ratio, 2.08; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.45-2.97; p < 0.001). The 90-day mortality of patients in the tirofiban group was lower than that in the no-tirofiban group (41.6% vs. 52.1%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47-0.77; p < 0.001). The frequency of any ICH (6.7% vs. 13.7%; p = 0.004) and symptomatic ICH (4.8% vs. 10.1%; p = 0.01) in the tirofiban group was significantly lower than that in the no-tirofiban group.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute BAO stroke who underwent endovascular treatment, intravenous tirofiban might be associated with favorable outcome, reduced mortality, and a decreased frequency of ICH.

Safety and Efficacy of Tirofiban in Severe Ischemic Stroke Patients Undergoing Mechanical Thrombectomy

Tirofiban has recently shown encouraging efficacy and safety among acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients with mechanical thrombectomy (MT). However, the benefits of tirofiban varied among studies depending on the patient’s condition, which was often not well analyzed. This study aimed to identify the characteristics of patients who may obtain the largest benefits from tirofiban. The efficacy endpoint was a favorable outcome defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0~2 at 90 days. The safety endpoints were intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and mortality at 90 days. Adjusted logistic regression analysis and subgroup analyses were utilized to investigate the factors associated with tirofiban and the outcome. All of 285 patients fit the inclusion criteria. Tirofiban was associated with a higher rate of favorable outcome (aOR 2.033, 95% CI, 1.002~4.123, p = 0.043) but not with an increased risk of ICH, sICH or mortality (p > 0.05). Moreover, subgroup analyses revealed that tirofiban was associated with favorable outcomes in patients with NIHSS > 14 (aOR 2.778, 95% CI 1.056~7.356, p = 0.038) but not in patients with NIHSS ≤ 14 (aOR 1.719, 95% CI 0.646~4.578, p = 0.278). No significant heterogeneity was found in the effect of tirofiban across the subgroups of age, sex, ASPECTS, time from onset to puncture, use of t-PA or stroke etiology (p for interaction > 0.05). The administration of tirofiban was associated with favorable outcomes in severe ischemic stroke patients, and further studies are needed to confirm this finding.

Safety and efficacy of adjunct tirofiban treatment following mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) resulting in successful reperfusion

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Tirofiban administration after mechanical thrombectomy (MT) remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of adjunct tirofiban treatment following MT for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients with large vessel occlusion (LVO) that resulted in successful reperfusion on digital subtraction angiography (DSA).

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted in Zhengzhou University University People's Hospital, an advanced stroke center in China. Consecutive patients with AIS who underwent endovascular therapy (EVT) were enrolled from June 2018 to January 2022. The safety endpoints were symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), total intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and 3-month mortality. The efficacy endpoints were 3-month modified Rankin scale (mRS) score and 24-h neurological improvement.

RESULTS

A total of 145 consecutive patients with AIS who underwent MT were analyzed, of whom 51 (35.2%) patients were in the tirofiban group. There were 30 (20.7%) patients with sICH, 50 (34.5%) patients suffered from ICH within 24-h post-MT, and 47 (32.4%) dead at 3-month. Besides, 31 (21.4%) patients achieved excellent clinical outcomes (mRS, 0-1), and 24-h neurological improvement was found in 29 (20.0%) patients. No statistically significant differences were found in safety outcomes on sICH, total ICH, and 3-month mortality, as well as efficacy outcomes on 3-month mRS scores (0-1) and 24-h neurological improvement between the two groups (P > 0.05 for all). Additionally, tirofiban was associated with 3-month mRS scores of 0-2 (adjusted odds ratio (OR), 3.75; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.41-10.02, P = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

Adjunct tirofiban treatment following MT for AIS patients with LVO that resulted in successful reperfusion on DSA was not correlated with the increased risk of safety endpoints on sICH, ICH, and 3-month mortality, and it may be associated with a lower 3-month mRS score.

Long-Term Outcomes of Local Tirofiban Infusion for Intracranial Atherosclerosis-Related Occlusion

Local tirofiban infusion has been reported as a rescue strategy for intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS)-related stroke. However, the long-term outcomes of local tirofiban infusion during endovascular reperfusion therapy (ERT) for ICAS-related stroke are still uncertain. This study aimed to investigate the long-term outcomes of local tirofiban infusion during ERT. We retrospectively analyzed acute patients with ICAS-related stroke who were treated with local tirofiban as a rescue strategy during ERT. The primary outcomes were ischemic stroke, transient ischemic stroke (TIA), and stroke-related death within 30 days. Secondary outcomes included ischemic stroke and TIA beyond 30 days and up to 2 years after ERT in the corresponding treated vessel, symptomatic brain hemorrhage, any stroke, and non-stroke-related death. During a median follow-up of 24.0 months, 12 patients developed an ischemic stroke and TIA (4 within 30 days and 8 afterward). The 1-year risk of stroke and TIA was 9.2% (95% confidence interval, 8.0–18.6%). This study demonstrates that 1-year outcomes of local tirofiban infusion were comparable to the results of intracranial stenting in patients with symptomatic ICAS. Local tirofiban infusion for ICAS-related stroke may be a feasible rescue strategy that can have a bridging role until the maximum effect of antiplatelet agents is achieved.

Safety and efficacy of different tirofiban administration routes on acute ischemic stroke patients with successful recanalization: A propensity score matching analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore the effect of different administration routes of a low dose of tirofiban on acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients with successful recanalization after endovascular treatment (EVT).

METHODS

This is a cohort study that retrospectively analyzed data of patients with AIS who underwent EVT and achieved successful recanalization from a prospective registry. Eligible patients were divided into three groups according to their use of tirofiban. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline bias. Safety outcomes included any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) and symptomatic ICH (sICH). Efficacy outcomes included arterial reocclusion, in-hospital mortality, 3-month mortality, and 3-month functional outcomes.

RESULTS

We included 821 patients with 306 in the no tirofiban group, 202 in the IA + IV tirofiban group, and 313 in the IV tirofiban group. After PSM, each group included 101 patients with balanced baseline characteristics. There was no difference between the IV tirofiban group and the no tirofiban group in terms of safety and efficacy outcomes (all p > 0.05). Compared with no tirofiban, IA + IV tirofiban group did not increase ICH (30.7% vs. 37.6%, p > 0.05) and sICH (6.9% vs. 17.8%, p > 0.05) whereas reduced 3-month mortality (14.3% vs. 28.7%, p < 0.05) and improved 3-month modified Rankin Scale (median 3 vs. 4, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

A low dose of tirofiban, regardless of their administration routes, was safe for AIS patients who achieved successful recanalization with EVT, whereas only IA + IV tirofiban improved clinical outcomes.

Continuous intravenous tirofiban can improve the 90-day functional outcome and decrease 90-day mortality without increasing bleeding risk in acute ischemic stroke patients treated by endovascular therapy: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of continuous intravenous administration of tirofiban in endovascular therapy is still unclear. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the 90-day functional prognosis in acute ischemic stroke patients (AIS) treated by endovascular treatment and intravenous administration of tirofiban.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases with the subject terms "tirofiban", "brain ischemia", and some related free words. Inclusion criteria were: (1) cohort study or randomized control trials; (2) AIS patients who received endovascular therapy; (3) the intervention or exposure was intravenous tirofiban monotherapy or combined with intra-arterial tirofiban; (4) containing data on modified Rankin Scale at 90 days and including at least one of the following indicators: mortality, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and recanalization. A summary odds ratio was calculated.

RESULTS

Twelve eligible studies, consisting of 3268 AIS participants, were identified. There was a significant trend of favorable outcomes (measured by mRS at three months) in the tirofiban group (ORs = 1.36; 95% CI = 1.09-1.70). In addition, compared with the non-tirofiban group, intravenous tirofiban was significantly associated with decreased risk of 90-day mortality (ORs = 0.73; 95% CI:0.59-0.89) and increased recanalization rate (ORs = 1.50; 95% CI:1.08-2.09) but no significant difference in rates of sICH (ORs = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.70-1.24) or ICH (ORs = 0.84; 95% CI = 0.62-1.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous tirofiban appears to be safe and effective when used following intra-arterial tirofiban or as monotherapy in AIS patients treated by endovascular therapy, which can improve the 90-day functional outcome, decrease the 90-day mortality and increase the possibility of early recanalization without increasing rates of sICH and ICH.

Efficacy and Safety of Tirofiban in Clinical Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke

Background

Intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular thrombectomy have been approved for acute ischemic stroke (AIS). However, only a minority of patients received these treatments in China. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tirofiban in patients with AIS who were not undergoing early recanalization treatments.

Methods

Patients with mild-to-moderate stroke [National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, 4–15] were enrolled in this study. Patients due to cardiogenic embolism were excluded. Eligible patients within 12 h from symptom onset were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive tirofiban (a loading dose of 0.4 μg/kg/min over 30 min and a maintenance dose of 0.1 μg/kg/min up to 48 h) followed by regular treatment or to receive regular treatment (aspirin at a dose of 100 mg per day for 90 days) (control). The primary outcome was the proportion of favorable functional outcomes at 90 days [defined as the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0–2]. The secondary outcomes included a shift in the distribution of the mRS scores at 90 days and the NIHSS score at 24 h and 7 days. The primary safety outcome was symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) within 7 days after tirofiban treatment.

Results

A total of 380 eligible patients were randomly assigned to the tirofiban group (n = 190) or the control group (n = 190). The proportion of favorable functional outcomes was higher in the tirofiban group (79.1%) than that in the control group (67.8%) at 90 days [odds ratio (OR), 1.80; 95% CI, 1.12–2.90; p = 0.0155]. An improvement was also observed in the overall distribution of the 90-day mRS scores (adjusted common OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.58–3.39; p < 0.0001). Additionally, the median NIHSS score was lower in the tirofiban group than in the control group at 7 days (3 vs. 5, p < 0.0001). Next, we observed that the occurrence of sICH did not differ between the two groups.

Conclusion

Our trial supports that tirofiban was safe and effective and might be a remedial treatment for patients with AIS who did not receive recanalization treatments.

Clinical Trial Registration

http://www.chictr.org.cn/, identifier: ChiCTR2000031297.

Efficacy outcomes and safety measures of intravenous tirofiban or eptifibatide for patients with acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

To review the literature for randomized control trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies investigating the safety and efficacy of tirofiban and eptifibatide in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library were searched for available papers published up to September 2021. The efficacy was evaluated based on the 3-month favorable outcome [modified Rankin scale (mRS) = 0-1], functional outcome (mRS = 0-2), and the last available National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score measured in each study. Twelve studies (two RCTs and 10 prospective cohorts) and 2926 patients were included. Treatment with tirofiban or eptifibatide had no effects on the favorable outcome (RR = 1.09, 95% CI 0.89-1.35, P = 0.411), functional outcome (RR = 1.12, 95% CI 0.98-1.28, P = 0.010), and last available NIHSS (WMD = - 2.32, 95% CI - 5.14 to 0.50, P = 0.106), but might increase mortality (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.71-0.99, P = 0.121). The sensitivity analyses showed that the meta-analyses were robust. There was no significant publication bias. Tirofiban did not increase the risk of ICH (P = 0. 423) and sICH (P = 0. 990) but increased the risk of fatal ICH (RR = 3.59, 95% CI 1.62-7.96, P = 0.002). Thrombolysis/thrombectomy did not influence any of the outcomes. Adding tirofiban or eptifibatide to thrombolysis/thrombectomy was not significantly associated with a favorable outcome (mRS = 0-1) nor functional outcome (mRS = 0-2) in patients with AIS at 3 months, but might be associated with mortality, possibly due to fatal ICH. The NIHSS was also not significantly different between the intervention and control groups after treatments.

Can Tirofiban Improve the Outcome of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tirofiban for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS), especially posterior circulation stroke (PCS).

Methods: We enrolled consecutive patients with AIS who suffered large artery occlusion (LAO) and underwent mechanical thrombectomy (MT) between January 2016 and May 2020. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether tirofiban was used during MT. The primary efficacy outcome was a favorable functional outcome, defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0–2 at 3 months. The safety outcomes were the rate of mortality at 3 months and the presence of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Cohorts were balanced using 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). Subgroup analysis was further performed to compare the efficacy and safety of tirofiban between the anterior circulation stroke (ACS) and PCS groups.

Results: A total of 292 patients were eligible for this study and divided into the tirofiban group (n = 51) and the no-tirofiban group (n = 241). In the propensity-score-matched cohort, the tirofiban group had a higher rate of favorable outcomes than the no-tirofiban group (49.0 vs. 25.5%, p = 0.014), and the mortality at 3 months showed a greater downward trend in the tirofiban group than the no-tirofiban group (15.6 vs. 33.3% p = 0.064). The risk of sICH and ICH was the same between the tirofiban and control groups (17.6 vs. 27.4% p = 0.236, 31.3 vs. 45.1% p = 0.154, respectively). Tirofiban use was predictive of favorable outcomes [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 2.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52–6.44, p = 0.043] after multiple logistic regression analysis. Subgroup analysis revealed that tirofiban use was significantly associated with favorable outcomes in ACS (aOR = 3.66, 95% CI 1.24–5.22, p = 0.019) but not in PCS (aOR = 1.12, 95% CI 0.47–7.52, p = 0.570).

Conclusion: We demonstrated that tirofiban may be associated with improving favorable outcome for the AIS patients who underwent MT, without increasing ICH or sICH. Furthermore, our results indicated that for PCS patients tirofiban may not be associated with favorable outcome, and more comprehensive randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this finding.

The Safety of Intra-arterial Tirofiban during Endovascular Therapy after Intravenous Thrombolysis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The safety and efficacy of tirofiban during endovascular therapy in patients undergoing intravenous thrombolysis with recombinant IV tPA remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of intra-arterial tirofiban use during endovascular therapy in patients treated with IV tPA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using a multicenter registry, we enrolled patients with acute ischemic stroke who underwent endovascular therapy. Safety outcomes included postprocedural parenchymal hematoma type 2 and/or thick subarachnoid hemorrhage, intraventricular hemorrhage, and 3-month mortality. Efficacy outcomes included the successful reperfusion rate, postprocedural reocclusion, and good outcomes at 3 months (mRS scores of 0-2). The tirofiban effect on the outcomes was evaluated using a multivariable analysis while adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Among enrolled patients, we identified 314 patients with stroke (279 and 35 patients in the no tirofiban and tirofiban groups, respectively) due to an intracranial artery occlusion who underwent endovascular therapy with intravenous thrombolysis. A multivariable analysis revealed no association of intra-arterial tirofiban with postprocedural parenchymal hematoma type and/or thick subarachnoid hemorrhage (adjusted OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.20-4.10; P = .918), intraventricular hemorrhage (adjusted OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.02-2.85; P = .467), and 3-month mortality (adjusted OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.04-1.87; P = .299). Intra-arterial tirofiban was not associated with good outcome (adjusted OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 0.89 -6.12; P = .099).

CONCLUSIONS

Using intra-arterial tirofiban during endovascular therapy after IV tPA could be safe.

Association between tirofiban monotherapy and efficacy and safety in acute ischemic stroke

Background

Studies have suggested that glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists such as tirofiban are beneficial for patients with acute coronary syndromes. However, it is still uncertain about the efficacy and safety of tirofiban in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS).

Methods

In this prospective non-randomized study, 255 AIS patients were recruited from 4 comprehensive stroke centers in China between January, 2017 and May, 2018. Among them,169 patients were treated with aspirin plus clopidogrel and 86 patients were treated with tirofiban. The primary functional outcome was the distribution of the 90 days’ modified Rankin Scale (mRS). The safety outcomes included the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) at discharge and mortality at 3 months.

Results

In the propensity score matched cohort, tirofiban alone was noninferior to the dual antiplatelet with regard to the primary outcome (adjusted common odds ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.46 to 2.04; P = 0.93). Mortality at 90 days was 10% in the dual antiplatelet group and 8% in the tirofiban group (adjusted odds ratio 0.75; 95% CI 0.08 to 7.40, p = 0.81). There was no difference of the ICH rate between two groups (adjusted odds ratio 0.44; 95% CI 0.13 to 1.48, p = 0.18). In the inverse probability of treatment weighting-propensity score-adjusted cohort, similar differences were found for functional and safety outcomes.

Conclusions

Our study suggested that tirofiban use appears to be safe as monotherapy in AIS treatment compared with common dual antiplatelet therapy, however, no improvement in functional outcomes was found.

Trial registration

Chinese clinical trial registry, ChiCTR2000034443, 05/07/2020. Retrospectively registered.

Antiplatelet therapy and outcomes following endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke: A systemic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The outcomes of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) receiving endovascular therapy (EVT) remains controversial. Thus, we sought to make a systematic review and meta-analysis of recent clinical trials to confirm the safety and efficacy of APT.

METHODS

All of clinical trails were systematically retrieved from PubMed, Embase and Cochrane. The endpoints or main outcome measures included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), 3-month mortality, successful recanalisation (SR) and 3-month functional independence (FI). Odd ratios (ORs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to synthesize effect size by using random-effects models. Sensitivity analysis was performed via calculation of rest data owiting one by one.

RESULTS

23 articles were included after screening. APT as an adjunct to EVT was associated with a higher likelihood of pooled successful recanalisation (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.07-2.00) and 3-month FI (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.01-1.51), no associated with sICH and 3-month mortality. However, Sensitivity analysis indicated that the association between APT and SR and 3-month FI were unstable. For patients with prior use of APT or receiving intravenous thrombolysis before EVT, no associated were found between APT and all of endpoints above.

CONCLUSION

Although adjuvant APT appears to increase the number of SR and 3-month FI, the results were unstable. Randomised controlled trials are needed to confirm the efficacy.

Intravenous Tirofiban Infusion After Angioplasty and Stenting in Intracranial Atherosclerotic Stenosis-Related Stroke

[Figure: see text].

Sequential tirofiban infusions combined with endovascular treatment may improve outcomes in acute ischemic stroke - a meta-analysis

In this meta-analysis, we explored whether tirofiban could safely improve outcomes when combined with endovascular therapy in acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library databases from January 2000 to October 2019 for relevant RCTs/non-RCTs. A total of 13 trials involving 2584 patients, of whom 893 (34.5%) received tirofiban, were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. The results suggested that tirofiban improved patient independence at 90 days (51.2% vs 42.4%; OR 1.26; p =0.02) without increasing the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR 1.01; p =0.96) or mortality (OR 0.86; p =0.09). There was no association between the use of tirofiban and recanalization rate (OR 1.35; p =0.11). Subgroup analysis showed that a loading dose followed by maintenance doses, but not a single dose, of tirofiban increased favorable 90-day functional outcomes (OR 1.49; p =0.0008). Moreover, low maintenance doses may be more effective than high maintenance doses (OR 1.41; p =0.02). These results suggest that adjunctive tirofiban treatment administered as a loading dose followed by low-dose maintenance may improve functional outcomes of endovascular therapy in acute ischemic stroke.

Efficacy and safety of rescue angioplasty and/or stenting for acute large artery occlusion with underlying intracranial atherosclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Intracranial angioplasty and/or stenting implantation is an important rescue treatment for the management of intracranial atherosclerosis-related occlusion (ICAS-O) after mechanical thrombectomy failure, but its safety and efficacy remain unclear. We investigated the safety and efficacy of rescue intracranial angioplasty and/or stenting for emergent large artery occlusion (LAO) with underlying ICAS.

METHODS

We searched for relevant full-text articles in EMBASE, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to March 1, 2020. We calculated the odds ratios (ORs) using random-effects models for symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), mortality, recanalization rate and favorable clinical outcome at 90 days between ICAS-O group treated by rescue therapy and Non ICAS-O group. RStudio software 1.3.959 was used to perform this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Ten studies were included with a total of 1639 patients, of which 450 (27.5 %) were in the ICAS-O group treated with intracranial angioplasty and/or stenting, and 1189 (72.5 %) were in the Non ICAS-O group. Overall, intracranial angioplasty and/or stenting did not improve the recanalization rate (OR, 0.67 [0.26-1.76]; p = 0.419) or favorable functional outcome (OR, 1.01 [0.64-1.58]; p = 0.97) in patients with underlying ICAS-O, and the risk of sICH (OR, 0.99 [0.59-1.68]; p = 0.983) and mortality (OR, 1.26 [0.87-1.83]; p = 0.225) did not significantly differ between ICAS-O and Non ICAS-O.

CONCLUSIONS

From these observational study results, rescue intracranial angioplasty and/or stenting seems safe in patients with emergent LAO after attempted thrombectomy, but further rigorous studies are warranted to confirm its efficacy.

The Application of Tirofiban in the Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tirofiban during endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) databases for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies (published before May 1, 2020; no language restrictions) comparing tirofiban administration to blank control during EVT in patients with AIS. Our primary end points were the 3-month functional outcome, recanalization rate, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, and 3-month mortality.

RESULTS

The incidence of 3-month modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-2 score of the tirofiban group was higher than that of the control group (odds ratio [OR] = 1.27, 95% CI [1.09, 1.48], p = 0.002) with heterogeneity (I2 = 34%, p = 0.11). Data pooled from the 6 studies describing the details of retriever stent in EVT revealed that tirofiban was associated with higher incidence of 3-month mRS 0-2 score (OR = 1.48, 95% CI [1.11, 1.96], p = 0.007). The recanalization rate was higher in the tirofiban group compared to the control group (OR = 1.66, 95% CI [1.16, 2.39], p = 0.006). There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR = 0.97, 95% CI [0.73, 1.31], p = 0.86) and intracranial hemorrhage (OR = 1.08, 95% CI [0.59, 1.97], p = 0.80) between tirofiban and non-tirofiban group. Besides, the tirofiban administration was associated with lower mortality (OR = 0.75, 95% CI [0.62, 0.91], p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

The application of tirofiban in EVT of AIS may improve functional outcomes and reduce mortality at 3 months. Besides, tirofiban does not seem to increase the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and intracranial hemorrhage, either in the anterior or posterior circulation stroke.

Use of Cangrelor in Cervical and Intracranial Stenting for the Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke: A "Real Life" Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In cases of large-vessel-occlusion strokes due to an underlying tandem internal carotid artery occlusion or intracranial atherosclerotic disease, concomitant stent placement may be needed. Immediate platelet inhibition is necessary, but to date, a standardized approach for antiplatelet inhibition in acute settings is still missing. Here we report our single-center experience about the safety and efficacy of periprocedural administration of cangrelor in patients with acute ischemic stroke due to intracranial or cervical artery occlusion undergoing stent placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated all cases of acute ischemic stroke that needed acute stent implantation and were treated with periprocedural administration of cangrelor between January 2019 and April 2020 at our institution. All patients who needed either extracranial or intracranial artery stent placement (in either the anterior or posterior circulation) were included.

RESULTS

We evaluated 38 patients in whom cangrelor was administered IV periprocedurally. Their mean age was 64 years (range, 26-85 years), with 25/38 male subjects and 13/38 female patients. In 26 patients (68.4%), a tandem occlusion was present and was treated with carotid artery stent placement, while 12 patients (31.6%) required an intracranial stent implantation. In 4 subjects (10.5%), an intracerebral hemorrhage occurred after the procedure. All patients in the series were alive 1 week after the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Although larger, multicentric randomized studies are strongly warranted, our results support the hypothesis of a possible role of cangrelor as a valuable therapeutic option in the management of platelet inhibition in acute ischemic stroke procedures after intra- or extracranial stent placement.

Intraarterial Versus Intravenous Tirofiban as an Adjunct to Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the treatment effect of intraarterial versus intravenous tirofiban during endovascular thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke.

METHODS

This study retrospectively examined 503 patients with acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion who received endovascular thrombectomy within 24 hours of stroke onset. Patients were divided into 3 groups: no tirofiban (n=354), intraarterial tirofiban (n=79), and intravenous tirofiban (n=70). The 3 groups were compared in terms of recanalization rate, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, in-hospital death rate, 3-month death, and 3-month outcomes measured by modified Rankin Scale score (good clinical outcome of 0-2, poor outcome of 5-6). The comparison was statistically assessed by propensity score matching, followed by Freidman rank-sum test and pairwise Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni correction.

RESULTS

The propensity score matching resulted in 92 matched triplets. Compared with the no-tirofiban group, the intravenous tirofiban group showed significantly increased recanalization (96.7% versus 64.1%, P<0.001), an increased rate of 3-month good outcome (69.5% versus 51.2%, P=0.034), and a lower rate of 3-month poor outcome (12.2% versus 41.4%, P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the tirofiban intravenous and no-tirofiban groups in terms of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (2.2% versus 0%, P=1.000). However, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage was significantly increased in the intraarterial-tirofiban group compared with the no-tirofiban group (19.1% versus 0%, P<0.001), with an increased rate of in-hospital death (23.6% versus 0% P<0.001), and increased rate of 3-month death (26.8% versus 11.1%, P=0.021). The intraarterial-tirofiban and no-tirofiban group showed no significant difference in recanalization rate (66.3% versus 64.1%, P=1.000).

CONCLUSIONS

As an adjunct to endovascular thrombectomy, intravenous tirofiban is associated with high recanalization rate and good outcome, whereas intraarterial tirofiban is associated with high hemorrhagic rate and death rate.

Safety and efficacy of tirofiban combined with endovascular therapy compared with endovascular therapy alone in acute ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis

Endovascular treatment (EVT) has been widely used for treating acute ischemic stroke (AIS). However, the safety and efficacy of treating AIS with tirofiban combined with EVT remain controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate this treatment. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that compared treatment with tirofiban combined with EVT and EVT alone were included in our meta-analysis. Those published from inception to March 31, 2020, were searched using the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Safety was assessed based on symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) incidence and 3-month mortality. Efficacy was assessed based on modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores at 3 months post-EVT and recanalization rates. Data were analyzed using either the random-effects or fixed-effects model based on the heterogeneity of studies. In total, one RCT, six prospective studies, and four retrospective studies (2387 AIS cases) were assessed. Our meta-analysis showed that tirofiban combined with EVT did not increase sICH risk (RR, 1.06; 95%CI, 0.79 to 1.42; P = 0.72) and 3-month mortality (RR, 0.87; 95%CI, 0.74 to 1.04; P = 0.12). Recanalization rates were not significantly different between patients treated with tirofiban combined with EVT and those treated with EVT alone (RR, 1.04; 95%CI, 1.00 to 1.08; P = 0.07), but tirofiban combined with EVT was significantly associated with favorable functional outcomes (mRS score, 0-2) in AIS patients (RR, 1.13; 95%CI, 1.02 to 1.25; P = 0.02). Tirofiban combined with EVT appears to be safe and potentially effective in treating AIS.

Efficacy and safety of tirofiban therapy in patients receiving endovascular treatment after large vessel ischaemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although tirofiban therapy is considered a potentially effective treatment to reduce the incidence of thrombotic complications in patients receiving endovascular treatment (EVT), the safety and efficacy of tirofiban remain controversial. Our objective was to investigate the efficacy and safety of EVT plus tirofiban therapy in patients with emergent large artery occlusion.

METHODS

Relevant articles from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies that compared treatment with tirofiban to treatment without tirofiban in patients undergoing EVT were retrieved from the PubMed and Embase databases. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the safety and efficacy outcomes based on a random effects model.

RESULTS

Twelve studies including 2533 patients were identified for the analysis. Overall, the risk of fatal intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) was higher for the treatment with tirofiban group than for the treatment without tirofiban group in patients with large artery occlusion who underwent EVT (p = 0.002), whereas the risk of any ICH, symptomatic ICH, parenchymal haematoma type 2, in-hospital mortality and 3-month mortality did not differ significantly (p > 0.05). No significant differences in reocclusion rate, recanalization rate or excellent functional outcome were found between the patients treated with or without tirofiban, but significantly favourable functional outcome at 3 months occurred in the tirofiban group (p = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Tirofiban administration in patients receiving EVT significantly improved 3-month favourable functional outcomes, whereas an increased risk of fatal ICH was also observed. Further rigorous trials are needed to verify the safety of tirofiban.

The Safety and Efficiency of Tirofiban in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated with Mechanical Thrombectomy: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

Introduction

Limited comparative studies have reported the safety and efficacy of tirofiban in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients after mechanical thrombectomy (MT). Additionally, the available studies are inconsistent with each other, which makes application of tirofiban unclear in neuro-intervention. Here, we performed a comparative retrospective study to investigate whether tirofiban combined with MT improves short- and long-term prognosis in AIS patients and whether its use is associated with complications.

Method

Retrospective data were collected for AIS patients admitted between January 2013 and January 2019 at three stroke centers. According to whether tirofiban was used during the operation, patients were divided into tirofiban group and control group. Multivariate and COX regression analyses were performed to determine the association of tirofiban treatment with safety and efficiency in subjects treated with MT.

Result

A total of 174 patients were analyzed, of whom 89 (51.1%) were treated with tirofiban. There were no differences in the incidence of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (10.2% vs. 10.6%, p=0.918), parenchymal hemorrhage type 2 (18.0% vs. 16.5%, p=0.793), and reocclusion at 24 h (3.4% vs. 10.6%, p=0.060) between the tirofiban group and control group. Multivariate regression showed that tirofiban was not associated with intracerebral hemorrhage, early neurological deterioration, neurological improvement at 7 days, functional independence at 3-month and 9-month follow-up, or death at 9-month follow-up (adjusted p > 0.05 for all). However, AIS patients treated with MT + tirofiban showed a trend towards acquiring faster functional independence, with a median time to acquire functional independence of 4.0 months compared with 6.5 months in the control group (risk ratio = 1.49, 95% confidence interval 0.98–2.27; long rank p=0.066).

Conclusion

Tirofiban may help AIS patients given MT to gain functional independence faster, without increasing the risk of complications.

Intra-arterial Tirofiban in a Male Nonagenarian with Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Case Report

Nonagenarians with acute ischemic stroke tend to have a higher mortality and morbidity than younger patients. Tirofiban is a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonist that has a therapeutic potential for ischemic stroke. Here, we provide a case report of a 93-year-old male patient with acute ischemic stroke. He presented with right-sided hemiparesis for 2 hours (National Institute of Health Stroke Scale, NIHSS = 23). Immediate treatment with endovascular tirofiban infusion achieved an improvement of intracranial blood flow and a progressively decreased NIHSS one day after admission (NIHSS = 16) and then seven days after admission (NIHSS = 7). After a follow-up of 90 days, the modified ranking score was 2. This case report suggests that endovascular application with tirofiban may be a favorable option for treating nonagenarians presenting with acute ischemic stroke and warrants further study.

Safety and Efficacy of Tirofiban Combined With Mechanical Thrombectomy Depend on Ischemic Stroke Etiology

Background and Purpose: The clinical use of tirofiban for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) who underwent mechanical thrombectomy (MT) remains controversial. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tirofiban combined with MT in AIS patients.

Methods: Patients with AIS who underwent MT from January 2014 to December 2018 were enrolled in three stroke units in China. Subgroup analyses were performed based on stroke etiology which was classified according to the Trial of ORG 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) criteria. Safety outcomes were in-hospital intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) and mortality at 3-month. Efficacy outcomes were favorable functional outcome and functional independence at 3-month and neurological improvement at 24 h, 3 d and discharge.

Results: In patients with large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) stroke, multivariate analyses revealed that tirofiban significantly decreased the odds of in-hospital ICH (adjusted OR = 0.382, 95% CI 0.180–0.809) and tended to increase the odds of favorable functional outcome at 3-month (adjusted OR = 3.050, 95% CI 0.969–9.598). By contrast, in patients with cardioembolism (CE) stroke, tirofiban was not associated with higher odds of favorable functional outcome at 3-month (adjusted OR = 0.719, 95% CI 0.107–4.807), but significantly decreased the odds of neurological improvement at 24 h and 3d (adjusted OR = 0.185, 95% CI 0.047–0.726; adjusted OR = 0.268, 95% CI 0.087–0.825).

Conclusions: Tirofiban combined with MT appears to be safe and effective in LAA patients, but has no beneficial effect on CE patients.

A prediction model of brain edema after endovascular treatment in patients with acute ischemic stroke

BACKGROUND

Clinical tools predicting brain edema after reperfusion therapy in acute ischemic stroke are scarce. We aim to develop a nomogram model to predict brain edema within the first 24 h after endovascular treatment (EVT) in the anterior cerebral circulation.

METHODS

A total of 199 patients were retrospectively identified in a single-center stroke registry. Brain edema was measured by midline shift (MLS). The associations between MLS and early neurologic outcomes were described. A nomogram predicting MLS was developed and internally validated. The nomogram was also compared with an available model using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and decision curve analyses.

RESULTS

Overall, 87 patients (43.7%) had MLS. The patients with MLS ≥ 6 mm showed progressive neurological deterioration according to repeated measures analysis of variance. Each millimeter increase in MLS was strongly correlated with the presence of in-hospital death or forgoing treatment (Spearman's rho = 0.429, P < .001). Patients with brain edema were less likely to have functional independence at 3 months (19.5% vs. 46.8%, P < .001). A nomogram model including 24-h CT ASPECT scores and cisternal effacement, hypertension and complete recanalization showed a C-index of 0.874. This tool exhibited a higher AUC and higher net benefit than the available model.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed a profound association between MLS and early neurologic outcomes. A nomogram model was developed to predict patients at risk of brain edema after EVT in the anterior cerebral circulation.