Intracoronary Versus Intravenous Low-Dose Tirofiban in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of intracoronary (IC) low-dose tirofiban versus intravenous (IV) administration on clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS: All published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of IC low-dose tirofiban (a bolus of ≤10 ug/kg) versus IV administration in patients with STEMI were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science from inception to June 2023, with no language restriction. The risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CI were calculated. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs involving 1,802 patients were included. Compared with the IV group, IC low-dose tirofiban was associated with improved major adverse cardiac events rate (RR 0.595, 95% CI 0.442-0.802; p=0.001), left ventricular ejection fraction (WMD 1.982, 95% CI 0.565-3.398; p=0.006), thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow grade (RR 1.065, 95% CI 1.004-1.131; p=0.037), and TIMI myocardial perfusion grade (RR 1.194, 95% CI 1.001-1.425; p=0.049). The two groups had no significant difference in bleeding events (RR 0.952, 95% CI 0.709-1.279; p=0.745). CONCLUSIONS: Intracoronary low-dose tirofiban administration may be a safe and effective alternative to IV administration in STEMI patients.

Predictors of outcome in large vessel occlusion stroke patients with intravenous tirofiban treatment: a post hoc analysis of the RESCUE BT clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the factors influencing good outcomes in patients receiving only intravenous tirofiban with endovascular thrombectomy for large vessel occlusion stroke. METHODS: Post hoc exploratory analysis using the RESCUE BT trial identified consecutive patients who received intravenous tirofiban with endovascular thrombectomy for large vessel occlusion stroke in 55 comprehensive stroke centers from October 2018 to January 2022 in China. RESULTS: A total of 521 patients received intravenous tirofiban, 253 of whom achieved a good 90-day outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 0-2). Younger age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.965, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.947-0.982; p < 0.001), lower serum glucose (aOR: 0.865, 95%CI: 0.807-0.928; p < 0.001), lower baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score (aOR: 0.907, 95%CI: 0.869-0.947; p < 0.001), fewer total passes (aOR: 0.791, 95%CI: 0.665-0.939; p = 0.008), shorter punctures to recanalization time (aOR: 0.995, 95%CI:0.991-0.999; p = 0.017), and modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) score 2b to 3 (aOR: 8.330, 95%CI: 2.705-25.653; p < 0.001) were independent predictors of good outcomes after intravenous tirofiban with endovascular thrombectomy for large vessel occlusion stroke. CONCLUSION: Younger age, lower serum glucose level, lower baseline NIHSS score, fewer total passes, shorter punctures to recanalization time, and mTICI scores of 2b to 3 were independent predictors of good outcomes after intravenous tirofiban with endovascular thrombectomy for large vessel occlusion stroke. CHINESE CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY IDENTIFIER: ChiCTR-IOR-17014167.

Prehospital Tirofiban Increases the Rate of Disrupted Myocardial Infarction in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Insights From the On-TIME 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), prehospital tirofiban significantly improved myocardial reperfusion. However, its impact on the rate of disrupted myocardial infarction (MI), particularly in the context of high-sensitive cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays, is still unclear. METHODS: The On-TIME 2 (The Ongoing Tirofiban In Myocardial infarction Evaluation 2) trial randomly assigned STEMI patients to prehospital tirofiban or placebo before transportation to a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) centre. In this post hoc analysis, we evaluated STEMI patients that underwent primary PCI and had measured hs-cTn levels. Troponin T levels were collected at 18-24 h and 72-96 h after PCI. Disrupted MI was defined as peak hs-cTn T levels ≤10 times the upper limit of normal (≤140 ng/L). RESULTS: Out of 786 STEMI patients, 47 (6%) had a disrupted MI. Disrupted MI occurred in 31 of 386 patients (8.0%) in the tirofiban arm and in 16 of 400 patients (4.0%) in the placebo arm (p=0.026). After multivariate adjustment, prehospital tirofiban remained independently associated with disrupted MI (OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.10 to 3.87; P= 0.027). None of the patients with disrupted MI died during the one-year follow-up, compared to a mortality rate of 2.6% among those without disrupted MI. CONCLUSION: Among STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI, the use of prehospital tirofiban was independently associated with a higher rate of disrupted MI. These results, highlighting a potential benefit, underscore the need for future research focusing on innovative pretreatment approaches which may increase the rate of disrupted MI.

Safety and efficacy of tirofiban treatment in the endovascular treatment of patients with acute ischaemic stroke - A meta-analysis.

OBJECT: The use of endovascular therapy (EVT) has become a widespread strategy for the clinical management of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). However, the combination of arterial injection of tirofiban with EVT for AIS continues to be a subject of controversy. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of this treatment approach. METHODS: Relevant studies were identified through a systematic literature search in Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases, covering articles published from January 2010 to January 2023. The efficacy outcomes included favorable functional outcomes, recanalization rates, and safety outcomes including mortality and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). RESULTS: The meta-analysis consisted of data from 13 studies, which included 1 randomized controlled trial (RCT), 7 prospective cohort studies, and 5 retrospective cohort studies, encompassing a total of 3477 patients. The study results indicate that the intra-arterial (IA) tirofiban+EVT for AIS is associated with significant improvements in favorable functional outcomes (OR, 1.21; 95%CI, 1.05-1.40; P = 0.009) and recanalization rate (OR, 1.33; 95%CI, 1.06-1.65; P = 0.01), as well as significant reductions in mortality rates (OR, 0.65; 95%CI, 0.53-0.79; P = 0.0001). Subgroup analysis revealed that administering a maintenance dose of intravenous (IV) tirofiban post-EVT was significantly associated with improved functional outcomes and reduced mortality in patients. In addition, there was no increase in the incidence of sICH (OR, 0.92; 95%CI, 0.71-1.20; P = 0.54). CONCLUSION: The administration of Intra-arterial tirofiban combined with EVT is an effective and safe treatment strategy for AIS, and postoperative maintenance doses of intravenous tirofiban may be more effective than IA only.

Renal function affects the safety and efficacy of tirofiban in acute ischemic stroke thrombectomy patients.

BACKGROUND: Acute ischemic stroke poses a significant health threat, and thrombectomy has become a routine treatment. Tirofiban has emerged as a promising adjunct therapy to minimize reocclusion after thrombectomy. We aimed to investigate whether renal function influences the safety and efficacy of tirofiban in patients undergoing endovascular therapy. METHODS: Patients' clinical data collected from the stroke unit were analyzed. The modified Rankin scale score and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) were used as outcome measures. RESULTS: A total of 409 patients (mean age: 66.5 years, 292 males [71.4%]) were included. Tirofiban significantly improved 3-month functional outcomes (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.408, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.120-5.175), reduced 3-month mortality (aOR = 0.364, 95% CI 0.155-0.856), and decreased the incidence of sICH (aOR = 0.339, 95% CI 0.149-0.767) in patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥ 90 mL/min/1.73 m². However, no significant improvement in prognosis was observed with tirofiban in patients with eGFR < 90 mL/min/1.73 m². Interaction analysis suggested a potential influence of renal function on tirofiban efficacy. CONCLUSION: Renal function may impact the efficacy of tirofiban. Administration of tirofiban in direct thrombectomy patients with normal renal function is safe and improves prognosis. However, the prognostic benefits of tirofiban are limited in patients with impaired renal function.

Intravenous antiplatelet therapy in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention : A report from the INVEST-STEMI group.

The use of intravenous antiplatelet therapy during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is not fully standardized. The aim is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of periprocedural intravenous administration of cangrelor or tirofiban in a contemporary ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) population undergoing PPCI. This was a multicenter prospective cohort study including consecutive STEMI patients who received cangrelor or tirofiban during PPCI at seven Italian centers. The primary effectiveness measure was the angiographic evidence of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow < 3 after PPCI. The primary safety outcome was the in-hospital occurrence of BARC (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium) 2-5 bleedings. The study included 627 patients (median age 63 years, 79% males): 312 received cangrelor, 315 tirofiban. The percentage of history of bleeding, pulmonary edema and cardiogenic shock at admission was comparable between groups. Patients receiving cangrelor had lower ischemia time compared to tirofiban. TIMI flow before PPCI and TIMI thrombus grade were comparable between groups. At propensity score-weighted regression analysis, the risk of TIMI flow < 3 was significantly lower in patients treated with cangrelor compared to tirofiban (adjusted OR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.30-0.53). The risk of BARC 2-5 bleeding was comparable between groups (adjusted OR:1.35; 95% CI: 0.92-1.98). These results were consistent across multiple prespecified subgroups, including subjects stratified for different total ischemia time, with no statistical interaction. In this real-world multicenter STEMI population, the use of cangrelor was associated with improved myocardial perfusion assessed by coronary angiography after PPCI without increasing clinically-relevant bleedings compared to tirofiban.

The effect of stent retriever mechanical thrombectomy combined with tirofiban in treating acute ischemic stroke.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effectiveness of stent retriever mechanical thrombectomy combined with tirofiban in treating acute ischemic stroke. METHODS: Markedly effective is defined as an SIS score of over 90, effective is indicated by an SIS score of between 50-90, and a score of below 50 suggests ineffective treatment results. RESULTS: ①The treatment's overall effectiveness in the observation group (91.30%) was significantly higher than that in the control group (75.56%) (p < 0.05). ②The vascular recanalization rate in the observation group (89.13%) was significantly higher than that in the control group (71.11%) (p < 0.05). ③The stent retrieval operation count (2.41 ± 0.23) was significantly lower in the observation group than in the control group (1.29 ± 0.16) (p < 0.05). ④ After treatment, the platelet aggregation rate (10.74 ± 3.95) and NIHSS scores (6.58 ± 1.04) were significantly lower, and the Barthel index (77.86 ± 7.21) was significantly higher in the observation group compared to the control group (26.47 ± 5.12, 7.75 ± 2.36, 68.12 ± 6.15) (p < 0.05). All platelet aggregation rate, NIHSS scores and Barthel Index showed significant improvement after treatment when compared to those before treatment (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The combined application of stent retriever mechanical thrombectomy and tirofiban in acute ischemic stroke treatment shows promising effectiveness. Compared to stent retriever alone, tirofiban adjunctive therapy enhances vascular recanalization, reduces retrieval procedures, shortens treatment duration, inhibits platelet aggregation, and improves neurological function recovery, daily living activities, and prognosis. Moreover, it doesn't significantly increase symptom-related risks.

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.

Examining the Efficacy, Safety, and Future Prospects of Tirofiban in Managing Myocardial Infarction among Diabetic Patients.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial infarction (MI) is a leading cause of death worldwide, particularly in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). Tirofiban, a platelet GP IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitor, has shown promise as adjunctive therapy in the emergency management of MI in diabetic patients. However, a comprehensive understanding of its use, efficacy, safety, and limitations in this patient population is necessary to optimize treatment strategies and improve patient outcomes. METHODOLOGY: This review article utilized a systematic approach to gather relevant research articles, clinical trials, and studies on the use of tirofiban in the therapy of MI in diabetic patients. Databases, such as PubMed and Google Scholar, were extensively searched using specific keywords related to tirofiban, MI, DM, STEMI, and antiplatelet therapy. The collected data were carefully examined, summarized, and analyzed to provide an extensive overview of using tirofiban in the management of MI in diabetic individuals. RESULTS: The analysis of the gathered literature revealed that tirofiban has demonstrated efficacy in improving clinical outcomes, reducing myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury, and promoting early recovery of heart function in diabetic patients with MI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The fast on- and off-rate and dose-dependent effect of the drug on platelet aggregation contribute to its effectiveness. However, caution should be exercised due to the potential risk of tirofiban-associated thrombocytopenia. Clinical trials and studies have provided evidence- based dosing guidelines, enabling the safe and effective administration of tirofiban in this patient population. CONCLUSION: Tirofiban, a platelet GP IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitor, shows promise as adjunctive therapy in the emergency management of MI in diabetic patients. It has demonstrated efficacy in improving clinical outcomes, reducing myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury, and promoting early recovery of heart function. However, healthcare providers should be cautious regarding the potential risk of tirofiban-associated thrombocytopenia. Further research is needed to optimize dosing guidelines, evaluate long-term safety, and fully understand the benefits and limitations of tirofiban in this patient population. The comprehensive insights provided in this review aim to enhance treatment strategies and improve patient outcomes in the emergency management of MI in diabetic individuals.

Perioperative complications of arteriovenous tirofiban administration versus oral dual antiplatelet therapy for stent-assisted embolization treated aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: A retrospective, controlled cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Major perioperative complications of stent-assisted embolization treated for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage patients include the formation of thromboembolic events (TEs) and hemorrhagic events (HEs), for which antiplatelet protocols play a key role. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective analysis to compare the differences between arteriovenous tirofiban administration with traditional oral dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). A total of 417 consecutive patients were enrolled. General clinical characteristics, as well as the perioperative ischemic and hemorrhagic events, were retracted in digital documents. Logistic regression was conducted to identify both risk and protective factors of perioperative TEs and HEs. RESULTS: Perioperative TEs occurred in 21 patients, with an overall perioperative TEs rate of approximately 5.04%; among these patients, the incidence of perioperative TEs in the tirofiban group was less than that in the DAPT group. Additionally, 66 patients developed perioperative HEs, with an incidence of approximately 15.83%; among these patients, the incidence of perioperative HEs was less than that in the DAPT group. No significant differences were seen between the two groups in terms of the mRS score at the time of discharge. CONCLUSION: This study indicated that an improved perioperative antiplatelet drug tirofiban was an independent protective factor for perioperative TEs in stent-assisted embolization of ruptured intracranial aneurysms, but it did not impart an elevated risk of perioperative HEs and had no significant effects on the near-term prognosis of the patients.

The impact of intraarterial, intravenous, and combined tirofiban on endovascular treatment for acute intracranial atherosclerotic occlusion.

Background and purpose: Adjunctive tirofiban administration in patients undergoing endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute large vessel occlusion (LVO) has been investigated in several studies. However, the findings are conflict. This study aimed to compare the effect of different administration pathways of tirofiban on patients undergoing EVT for acute LVO with intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD). Methods: Patients were selected from the ANGEL-ACT Registry (Endovascular Treatment Key Technique and Emergency Workflow Improvement of Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Prospective Multicenter Registry Study) and divided into four groups: intra-arterial (IA), intravenous (IV), and intra-arterial plus intravenous (IA+IV) and non-tirofiban. The primary outcome was 90-day ordinal modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score, and the secondary outcomes included the rates of mRS 0-1, 0-2, and 0-3 at 90-day, successful recanalization. The safety outcomes were symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and other safety endpoints. The multivariable logistic regression models adjusting for potential baseline confounders were performed to compare the outcomes. A propensity score matching (PSM) with a 1:1:1:1 ratio was conducted among four groups, and the outcomes were then compared in the post-matched population. Results: A total of 502 patients were included, 80 of which were in the IA-tirofiban group, 73 in IV-tirofiban, 181 in (IA+IV)-tirofiban group, and 168 in the non-tirofiban group. The median (IQR) 90-day mRS score in the four groups of IA, IV, IA+IV, and non-tirofiban was, respectively 3(0-5) vs. 1(0-4) vs. 1(0-4) vs. 3(0-5). The adjusted common odds ratio (OR) for 90-day ordinal modified Rankin Scale distribution with IA-tirofiban vs. non-tirofiban was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.45-1.30, P = 0.330), with IV-tirofiban vs. non-tirofiban was 1.36 (95% CI, 0.78-2.36, P = 0.276), and with (IA+IV)-tirofiban vs. non-tirofiban was 1.03 (95% CI, 0.64-1.64, P = 0.912). The adjusted OR for mRS 0-1 and mRS 0-2 at 90-day with IA-tirofiban vs. non-tirofiban was, respectively 0.51 (95% CI, 0.27-0.98, P = 0.042) and 0.50 (95% CI, 0.26-0.94, P = 0.033). The other outcomes of each group were similar with non-tirofiban group, all P was >0.05. After PSM, the common odds ratio (OR) for 90-day ordinal modified Rankin Scale distribution with IA-tirofiban vs. non-tirofiban was 0.41 (95% CI, 0.18-0.94, P = 0.036), and the OR for mRS 0-1 and mRS 0-2 at 90-day with IA-tirofiban vs. non-tirofiban was, respectively 0.28 (95% CI, 0.11-0.74, P = 0.011) and 0.25 (95% CI, 0.09-0.67, P = 0.006). Conclusions: Intra-arterial administration of tirofiban was associated with worse outcome than non-tirofiban, which suggested that intra-arterial tirofiban had a harmful effect on patients undergoing EVT for ICAD-LVO. Clinical trial registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, Unique identifier: NCT03370939.

Effects of Solitaire AB stent thrombectomy with tirofiban and butylphthalide on neurological function and inflammatory factors in acute cerebral infarction patients.

BACKGROUND: Acute cerebral infarction profoundly affects patients' neurological function and quality of life. This study explores the impact of Solitaire AB stent thrombectomy, combined with tirofiban and butylphthalide, on neurological function and inflammatory factors in patients with acute cerebral infarction. METHODS: Seventy-three eligible patients treated between 2021 and 2023 were divided into a control group (Solitaire AB stent thrombectomy) and a treatment group (Solitaire AB stent thrombectomy with tirofiban and butylphthalide). Postoperative neurological function scores and inflammatory factor levels were analyzed. RESULTS: The treatment group demonstrated a higher clinical effective rate, lower National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores at one day and seven days and higher Mini-Mental State Examination and Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores post-treatment. Inflammatory factor levels (Neuron Specific Enolase (NSE), S100-ß, TNF-α and IL-6) were lower in the treatment group. No significant differences in adverse outcomes were observed. CONCLUSION: Solitaire AB stent thrombectomy with tirofiban and butylphthalide shows superior efficacy, improving neurological function and inflammatory factors without increasing adverse outcomes. This offers valuable insights for clinical treatment of acute cerebral infarction.

The safety and efficacy of intra-arterial low-dose tirofiban administration during endovascular therapy in patients with large ischemic core volume.

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intra-arterial (IA) administration of low- dose tirofiban during endovascular therapy in patients with large ischemic core volumes on initial brain CT. Patients were divided into two groups based on the use of IA tirofiban. We identified 87 patients (16 and 71 patients in the tirofiban and no-tirofiban groups, respectively) with acute ischemic stroke due to intracranial artery occlusion who underwent endovascular therapy with a low Alberta Stroke Program Early CT scores (2-5). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed no association between IA tirofiban administration and serious postprocedural hemorrhagic complications (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.720; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.099-5.219; p = 0.960), any radiologic hemorrhage (aOR 0.076; 95% CI 0.003-2.323; p = 0.139), or 3-month mortality (aOR, 0.087; 95% CI 0.005-1.501; p = 0.093). However, IA tirofiban was associated with a lower 90-day mRS score (aOR, 0.197; 95% CI 0.015-1.306; p = 0.017) and change of NIHSS compared with baseline (aOR, 0.698; 95% CI 0.531-0.917; p = 0.010). IA tirofiban administration during endovascular therapy in patients with large ischemic core volumes may be effective and safe.

Adjunct Intraarterial or Intravenous Tirofiban Versus No Tirofiban After Successful Recanalization of Basilar Artery Occlusion Stroke: The BASILAR Registry.

BACKGROUND: Approximately half of patients who achieve successful reperfusion do not achieve functional independence. The present study sought to investigate the clinical outcomes and safety of intraarterial or intravenous tirofiban as adjunct therapy in patients with acute basilar artery occlusion who had achieved successful recanalization with endovascular treatment. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the national, prospective BASILAR (Endovascular Treatment for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion Study) registry, 458 patients who met inclusion criteria were divided into 3 groups based on tirofiban administration (no tirofiban, n=262; intravenous tirofiban, n=101; intraarterial+intravenous tirofiban, n=95). Their clinical outcomes were compared with 90-day modified Rankin Scale scores. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs were obtained by logistic regression models and propensity score matching. Safety outcomes included any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH, and mortality. Among 458 included patients, 184 (40.2%) achieved a favorable outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0-3). There were no differences between the intravenous tirofiban group and the no tirofiban group in terms of safety and clinical outcomes (all P>0.05). Compared with the no tirofiban group, the intraarterial+intravenous tirofiban group had higher odds of 90-day modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 3 (aOR, 2.44 [95% CI, 1.30-4.64], P=0.006) and lower 3-month mortality (aOR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.19-0.71], P=0.002) without an increase in any ICH (aOR, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.09-1.01], P=0.07) or symptomatic ICH (aOR, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.03-0.90], P=0.05). Similar results of intraarterial+intravenous tirofiban on improving clinical outcomes were detected in novel cohorts constructed by propensity score matching. CONCLUSIONS: Intraarterial+intravenous rather than intravenous tirofiban improved clinical outcomes without increasing the frequency of symptomatic ICH among patients with basilar artery occlusion after successful endovascular treatment. Further studies are needed to delineate the roles of intraarterial+intravenous tirofiban in patients with basilar artery occlusion receiving endovascular treatment.

Intravenous Tirofiban Versus Alteplase Before Endovascular Treatment in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Pooled Analysis of the DEVT and RESCUE BT Trials.

BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous tirofiban versus alteplase before endovascular treatment (EVT) in acute ischemic stroke patients with intracranial large vessel occlusion. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis using data from 2 multicenter, randomized trials: the DEVT trial (Direct Endovascular Treatment for Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke) from May 2018 to May 2020 and the RESCUE BT trial (Intravenous Tirofiban Before Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke) from October 2018 to October 2021. Patients with acute intracranial large vessel occlusion within 4.5 hours from last known well were dichotomized into 2 groups: tirofiban plus EVT versus alteplase bridging with EVT. The primary outcome was functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2) at 90 days. Safety outcomes included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and 3-month mortality. Multivariable logistic regression (adjusting for baseline systolic blood pressure, occlusion site, onset-to-puncture time, anesthesia, and first choice of EVT) and propensity score overlap weighting (balance in demographic covariates, stroke characteristics, and initial management between groups) were performed. RESULTS: One-hundred and eighteen alteplase-treated patients in the DEVT trial and 98 tirofiban-treated patients in the RESCUE BT trial were included (median age, 70 years; 115 [53.2%] men). The rate of functional independence was 60.2% in the tirofiban group compared with 46.6% in the alteplase group (adjusted odds ratio, 1.25 [95% CI, 0.60-2.63]). Compared with alteplase, tirofiban was not associated with increased risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (6.8% versus 9.2%; P=0.51) and mortality (17.8% versus 19.4%; P=0.76). The propensity score overlap weighting analyses showed consistent outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with intracranial large vessel occlusion within 4.5 hours of onset, tirofiban plus EVT was comparable to alteplase bridging with EVT regarding the efficacy and safety outcomes. These findings should be interpreted as preliminary and require confirmation in a randomized trial. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.chictr.org.cn; Unique identifiers: ChiCTR-IOR-17013568 and ChiCTR-INR-17014167.

Early tirofiban versus heparin for bridging dual antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing coronary endarterectomy combined with coronary artery bypass grafting: a multicenter randomized controlled trial protocol (the THACE-CABG trial).

BACKGROUND: For complete revascularization, patients with diffuse coronary artery disease should have a coronary endarterectomy and a coronary artery bypass graft (CE-CABG). Sadly, CE can lead to a lack of endothelium, which raises the risk of thrombotic events. Even though daily dual antiplatelet therapies (DAPT) have been shown to reduce thrombotic events, the risk of perioperative thrombotic events is high during the high-risk period after CE-CABG, and there is no consistent protocol to bridge DAPT. This trial aims to compare safety and efficacy between tirofiban and heparin as DAPT bridging strategies after CE-CABG. METHODS: In phase I, 266 patients undergoing CE-CABG will be randomly assigned to tirofiban and heparin treatment groups to compare the two treatments in terms of the primary safety endpoint, chest tube drainage in the first 24 h. If the phase I trial shows tirofiban non-inferiority, phase II will commence, in which an additional 464 patients will be randomly assigned. All 730 patients will be studied to compare major cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) between the groups in the first 30 days after surgery. DISCUSSION: Given the possible benefits of tirofiban administration after CE-CABG, this trial has the potential to advance the field of adult coronary heart surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: chictr.org.cn, ChiCTR2200055697. Registered 6 January 2022. https://www.chictr.org.cn/com/25/showproj.aspx?proj=149451 . Current version: 20,220,620.

Clinical study of Edaravone Dexborneol combined with Tirofiban in treatment of Acute Cerebral Infarction.

Objective: To explore the clinical efficacy and safety of edaravone dexborneol combined with tirofiban in the treatment of acute cerebral infarction. Methods: This is a retrospective study. A total of 80 patients with acute cerebral infarction (ACI) treated in Cangzhou People's Hospital from March 2018 to December 2021 were selected, and randomly divided into the routine group(n=40) and intervention group(n=40) according to the principle of random draw. Neurological deficits in the two groups were evaluated and compared before and after treatment using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). The quality of life of the patients was evaluated by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Results: Before treatment, NIHSS and mRS scores of the two groups were not statistically significant(p>0.05); the levels of Vmin and Qmin in the two groups showed no statistical significance(p>0.05); no statistical significance was found in CRP or IL-6 levels between the two groups(p>0.05). After treatment for 14 days, the NIHSS and mRS scores of the two groups both decreased, which was more significant in the intervention group(p<0.05); Vmin and Qmin levels increased in both groups, which was more obvious in the intervention group(p<0.05); CRP and IL-6 levels reduced in both groups, which was more remarkable in the intervention group(p<0.05). The incidences of relevant adverse drug reactions presented no differences between the two groups during treatment(p>0.05). Conclusion: Edaravone dexborneol combined with tirofiban in the treatment of ACI can effectively improve patients' neurological deficits, quality of life and cerebral blood flow, and reduce inflammatory factor levels, have significant clinical efficacy and high clinical treatment safety.

Early tirofiban administration after intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke (ADVENT): Study protocol of a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Nearly half of patients with acute ischemic stroke who undergo intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) fail to achieve excellent functional outcomes. Early administration of tirofiban after IVT may improve patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of early tirofiban administration after intravenous tenecteplase in patients with acute ischemic stroke. METHODS AND DESIGN: The ADVENT trial is a multicenter, randomized, parallel-controlled, double-blind clinical trial. A total of 1084 patients undergoing IVT without subsequent endovascular treatment will be recruited from multiple hospitals in China. Subjects will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive tirofiban or placebo, which will be infused within 6 h after IVT until 24 h after IVT, at 0.4 µg/kg/min for 30 min and then at 0.1 µg/kg/min. The primary efficacy outcome is the proportion of patients with excellent functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale (mRS) ⩽ 1) at 90 days. Secondary outcomes include the proportion of patients with favorable functional outcomes (mRS ⩽ 2) at 90 days and neurological functional assessments evaluated during hospitalization. Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage will be the primary safety outcome. Mortality and other adverse events will be recorded. DISCUSSION: This pivotal trial will provide important data on the early administration of antiplatelet therapy after IVT and may promote progress in treatment standards. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06045156).

Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in the treatment of thromboembolic events related to endovascular treatment of cerebral aneurysms-systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Thromboembolism complication is considered the most common complication associated with the treatment of endovascular. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the studies investigating the effect of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor agents on thromboembolic complications during endovascular aneurysm coiling. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This systematic review investigated the outcome of the use of three glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor agents (ie abciximab, tirofiban, and eptifibatide) on the thromboembolic complications during endovascular aneurysm coiling. The electronic databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Medline were searched up to 25 June 2021, using the keywords "Abciximab," "Tirofiban," and "Eptifibatide" incombination with "Thromboembolism Complication," "Aneurysms," and "Endovascular Aneurysm Coiling." RESULTS: A total of 21 articles were found to be eligible and included in this review. The rates of complete and partial recanalization were estimated to be 56% and 92% in patients who underwent abciximab and tirofiban therapy, respectively. Rupture aneurysms were found in the majority of patients. In general, the mortality rate of the patients treated for thromboembolic complications during endovascular treatment of cerebral aneurysms with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors was found to be 4.8% (CI 95%:0.027-0.067; p < .005). The average remission rate in studies investigating thromboembolism was 91% (CI 95%:0.88-0.95, I2 : 65.65/p < .001). CONCLUSION: Based on the obtained results, a higher mean rate of complete recanalization by eptifibatide was found in studies in which abciximab or tirofiban were used, compared to other mentioned agents. Moreover, the amount of hemorrhage was reported to be less after using tirofiban rather than abciximab.

The Efficacy and Safety of Tirofiban Use in Endovascular Thrombectomy for Intravenous Thrombolysis Applicable Patients with Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke-a Post Hoc Analysis from the Direct-MT Trial.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tirofiban use in endovascular thrombectomy for intravenous thrombolysis applicable patients of large vessel occlusion stroke with data from Direct-MT trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Direct-MT was the first randomized controlled trial to prove the non-inferiority of thrombectomy alone to bridging therapy (intravenous thrombolysis before thrombectomy) for large vessel occlusion stroke. Patients who underwent endovascular procedure were included and divided into thrombectomy-alone group and bridging therapy group. The effect of tirofiban use on 90 days MRS distribution, MRS 0-2 and mortality, successful reperfusion, the ASPECTS and outcome lesion volume of index stroke, re-occlusion of the treated vessel, futile recanalization and safety outcomes were further evaluated in both groups after adjustment for relevant confounding factors. The interaction between tirofiban and rt-PA was also assessed. RESULTS: Of 639 patients included in this analysis, 180 patients underwent thrombectomy with tirofiban use (28.2%). Patients with tirofiban use had lower percentage of bridging therapy (41.1% vs 54.3%, P = 0.003), higher proportion of large artery atherosclerosis (P < 0.001) and more emergent stenting (30.56% vs 6.97%, P < 0.001). After adjustment for confounding factors, the 90-day modified Rankin Scale distribution, successful final recanalization rate, outcome lesion volume of index stroke on CT and intracranial hemorrhage risk showed no difference after tirofiban use in thrombectomy-alone group and in bridging therapy group. No interaction effect between tirofiban and rt-PA was detected. CONCLUSION: Based on data from Direct-MT trial, tirofiban is a safe medication for intravenous thrombolysis applicable patients with large vessel occlusion stroke undergoing thrombectomy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3, cohort study of randomized trial.