| Popis: |
In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, we sought to compare the efficacy and safety of tirofiban administered in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) after intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) with or without mechanical thrombectomy (MT).We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Library for randomized clinical trials and observational studies published between 2001 and 2021 that provided outcomes of AIS patients who underwent IVT alone or IVT bridging with or without tirofiban. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-2 at 90 days. The secondary outcomes included the rates of (1) an excellent outcome defined as a mRS score of 0 or 1 at 90 days, (2) any type of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), (3) symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), (4) mortality, and (5) successful recanalization.We included 722 patients with IVT bridging therapy in 3 trials; there were 171 patients in the tirofiban group and 551 patients in the nontirofiban group. We included 846 patients with IVT alone in 7 studies; there were 471 patients in the tirofiban group and 375 patients in the nontirofiban group. The patients treated with tirofiban had a reduced risk of mortality compared to the patients treated without tirofiban during IVT bridging (OR, 0.46; 95 % CI, 0.24-0.89; p = 0.02), but no significant differences were found in safety outcomes on sICH, ICH, recanalization or efficacy outcomes on modified Rankin scale 0-2 (p 0.05). Pooled results showed that tirofiban combined with IVT alone did not increase the risks of sICH, ICH or mortality but was significantly associated with excellent (OR, 2.68; 95 % CI, 1.58-4.55; P = 0.0003) and favorable (OR, 2.36; 95 % CI, 1.58-3.52; p 0.0001) functional outcomes at 90 days.In AIS patients who underwent IVT or bridging therapy, early administration of tirofiban may be effective and safe, but further studies are needed to confirm the efficacy. |
Full Text from ScienceDirect