Comparison of Safety and Efficacy after Emergency Stenting in Patients Exhibiting Intracranial Atherosclerotic Stenosis Associated with Large-vessel Occlusion with and without Intravenous Infusion of Tirofiban.

PURPOSE

Intracranial rescue stent angioplasty is a bailout strategy for acute stroke patients in cases of unsuccessful endovascular thrombectomy due to underlying atherosclerotic stenosis. However, there is no consensus on a preprocedural and intraprocedural antiplatelet regimen. The aim of this single-centre study was to compare the safety and efficacy of emergency stenting in patients exhibiting intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis-related acute large-vessel occlusion with or without peri-interventional intravenous infusion of tirofiban.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 78 patients who were treated with rescuestent angioplasty between 2010 and 2019 due to acute ischaemic stroke. The patients were divided into 2 groups: those who received peri-interventional intravenous tirofiban and those who did not receive tirofiban. We compared clinical safety and functional outcomes in both treatment groups with symptomatic haemorrhage as the primary endpoint. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression was performed to investigate the association between tirofiban and outcome measures.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients were treated with intravenous tirofiban (47.4%), and 41 patients did not receive intravenous tirofiban (52.6%). Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of symptomatic haemorrhage (16.2% in the tirofiban group versus 14.6% in the control group, p = 0.847). The 3-month mortality (21.6% in the tirofiban group versus 17.1% in the control group, p = 0.611) and good functional outcomes according to the modified Rankin scale (45.9% versus 34.1%, p = 0.289) were comparable.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study suggest that the application of tirofiban for rescue stenting after failed mechanical thrombectomy is safe.