Trial reportActa pharmacologica Sinica2009
Benefit of standard versus low-dose tirofiban for percutaneous coronary intervention in very elderly patients with high-risk acute coronary syndrome.
Trial report in Acta pharmacologica Sinica, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety Profile and Complication Rates in Emergency Off-label Use of Tirofiban in Interventional Neuroradiology : An Observational Dual Center Study.Clinical neuroradiology · 2023Observational
- Effects of intracoronary injection of nicorandil and tirofiban on myocardial perfusion and short-term prognosis in elderly patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction after emergency PCI.World journal of emergency medicine · 2020Article
- Age and outcomes of primary percutaneous intervention for ST elevation myocardial infarction in a tertiary center-are we there yet?Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2015Article
- Severe thrombocytopenia and alveolar hemorrhage represent two types of bleeding tendency during tirofiban treatment: case report and literature review.International journal of hematology · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety between standard and low-dose tirofiban in the treatment of elderly high-risk non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
methodsNinety-four very elderly (>or=80 years) high-risk patients with NSTE-ACS were randomly assigned to the standard or the low-dose group. Upstream tirofiban was administered intravenously with a bolus dose of 0.4 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) over a period of 30 min after the diagnosis had been confirmed, and was followed by a 36-48 h infusion of 0.10 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) or 0.075 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1). PCI was performed within 24 h of admission. Platelet aggregation inhibition and thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) grade flow were assessed. The major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including death, myocardial infarction, recurrent angina and urgent target-vessel revascularization (TVR), were documented at 7 d, 30 d, and 6 months, and bleeding events were recorded at 7 d.
resultsAlthough a significantly higher inhibition of platelet aggregation was observed in the standard-dose group (P<0.05), angiographic PCI success was similar between the two groups (P>0.05). The rate of MACEs was not significantly different at 7 days (2.1% vs 4.4%, P=0.61), 30 days (6.3% vs 8.7%, P=0.71) and 6 months (14.6% vs 17.4%, P=0.71). Major bleeding events were significantly higher in the standard-dose group (10.4% vs 0.0%, P=0.03).
conclusionIn very elderly high-risk patients with NSTE-ACS undergoing PCI, low-dose tirofiban offered about the same level of protection from major ischemic events that standard doses did, with less associated bleeding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.