ArticleHeliyon2022
Low-dose intravenous tirofiban infusion after endovascular recanalization for non-acute middle cerebral artery occlusion.
Article in Heliyon, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of tirofiban treatment with outcomes following endovascular therapy in cardioembolic stroke: insights from the RESCUE BT randomized trial.European journal of medical research · 2023Trial
- Analysis of factors influencing recurrent stroke due to symptomatic non-acute middle cerebral artery occlusion and prediction modelling.BMC neurology · 2026Article
- Association between ASPECTS region of infarction and clinical outcome in non-acute large vessel occlusion ischaemic stroke after endovascular recanalisation.Stroke and vascular neurology · 2025Article
- Effect of tirofiban arterial injection on neurological and endothelial function in acute ischemic stroke patients beyond the thrombolysis time window.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Endovascular recanalization for patients with symptomatic non-acute middle cerebral artery occlusion still remines challenging. Postoperative treatment is still controversial. This study aims to investigate the safety and effectiveness of tirofiban after elective angioplasty in patients with non-acute middle cerebral artery occlusion related ischemic stroke. Methods: Our study is a retrospective case series study of 48 stroke patients who received elective endovascular recanalization for middle cerebral artery occlusion. Patients who received EVT without hemorrhage were divided into 2 groups: those who did not receive intravenous tirofiban treatment (control group, n = 25); those who received continuous intravenous infusion of 0.2-0.3 mg/h tirofiban for 48 h after endovascular recanalization (intravenous tirofiban group, n = 23). Early reocclusion of treated arteries, symptomatic hemorrhage, and 90-day functional outcome of the 2 groups were compared. Results: The 90-day mRS score and NIHSS score after endovascular recanalization showed no significantly different between the two groups. However, the rate of mRS score reverse (≥1) was significantly higher in the intravenous tirofiban group than the control (73.9% versus 24.0%, P = 0.001), and the rate of NIHSS score reverse (≥3) in the intravenous tirofiban group was also higher (43.5% verse 16.0%, P = 0.037). The rate of early reocclusion, symptomatic hemorrhage (4.3% versw 4%, P = 0.734), showed no difference between the two groups. Conclusions: Low-dose intravenous tirofiban infusion (0.2-0.3 mg/h for 48 h) after endovascular treatment seems to be safe and potentially effective for non-acute middle cerebral artery occlusion patients.
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.