Neurosurgery Center, Department of Cerebrovascular Surgery, Engineering Technology Research Center of Education Ministry of China on Diagnosis and Treatment of Cerebrovascular Disease, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510280, China.
Department of Neurology, Xinqiao Hospital and The Second Affiliated Hospital, Army Medical University (Third Military Medical University), Chongqing, China.
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2024 Sep;244:108463. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2024.108463. Epub 2024 Jul 20.
This study assesses the safety and efficacy of tirofiban for patients with large vessel occlusion stroke after intravenous thrombolysis.
This study data was from SUSTAIN, DEVT, and RESCUE BT trials. According to whether the use of tirofiban who underwent endovascular treatment and preceding intravenous thrombolysis was divided into the tirofiban group and the no-tirofiban group. The safety outcomes were symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, any intracranial hemorrhage within 48 h, and 3-month mortality. The efficacy outcome was defined as a score of 0-2 on the modified Rankin Scale scores at 3 months.
A total of 372 patients with intravenous thrombolysis were included in these SUSTAIN, DEVT, and RESCUE BT trials. Adjusted multivariate analysis showed that tirofiban with intravenous thrombolysis was not associated with symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (aOR, 0.87; 95 % CI, 0.49-1.57; P=0.65), any intracranial hemorrhage within 48 h (aOR, 1.00; 95 % CI, 0.60-1.66; P=1.00), 3-month mortality (aOR, 1.10; 95 % CI, 0.56-2.19; P=0.78) and 3-month modified Rankin Scale scores 0-2 (aOR, 0.72; 95 % CI, 0.42-1.25; P=0.25) in patients with acute large vessel occlusion. In the subgroup analysis, we found that tirofiban was not recommended for females (aOR, 0.34; 95 % CI, 0.12-0.93), baseline Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score≤9 (aOR, 0.37; 95 % CI, 0.18-0.76), and cardiogenic embolism (aOR, 0.36; 95 % CI, 0.14-0.97).
Tirofiban combined with intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute large vessel occlusion may be safe. Further studies need to confirm the effectiveness of tirofiban after intravenous thrombolysis in different stroke etiology.
本研究评估了替罗非班在静脉溶栓后大血管闭塞性卒中患者中的安全性和疗效。
本研究数据来自 SUSTAIN、DEVT 和 RESCUE BT 试验。根据是否使用替罗非班进行血管内治疗和先前的静脉溶栓,将患者分为替罗非班组和无替罗非班组。安全性结局为症状性颅内出血、48 小时内任何颅内出血和 3 个月死亡率。疗效结局定义为 3 个月时改良 Rankin 量表评分为 0-2。
共纳入 SUSTAIN、DEVT 和 RESCUE BT 试验 372 例静脉溶栓患者。调整多变量分析显示,替罗非班联合静脉溶栓与症状性颅内出血无关(调整比值比,0.87;95%可信区间,0.49-1.57;P=0.65)、48 小时内任何颅内出血(调整比值比,1.00;95%可信区间,0.60-1.66;P=1.00)、3 个月死亡率(调整比值比,1.10;95%可信区间,0.56-2.19;P=0.78)和 3 个月改良 Rankin 量表评分 0-2(调整比值比,0.72;95%可信区间,0.42-1.25;P=0.25)。在亚组分析中,我们发现替罗非班不推荐用于女性(调整比值比,0.34;95%可信区间,0.12-0.93)、基线 Alberta 卒中项目早期 CT 评分≤9(调整比值比,0.37;95%可信区间,0.18-0.76)和心源性栓塞(调整比值比,0.36;95%可信区间,0.14-0.97)。
替罗非班联合静脉溶栓治疗急性大血管闭塞患者可能是安全的。需要进一步的研究来确认替罗非班在不同病因卒中患者静脉溶栓后的有效性。