ArticleCardiovascular and interventional radiology2023
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.
Article in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intravenous Tirofiban for Preventing Acute In-Stent Thrombosis in Emergent Carotid Artery Stenting: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical neuroradiology · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of tirofiban in acute ischemic stroke due to intracranial atherosclerotic disease for patients undergoing endovascular treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neuroradiology · 2025Pooled it
- The efficacy and safety of continuous intravenous tirofiban for acute ischemic stroke patients treated by endovascular therapy: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Management of intracranial arterial stenosis during mechanical thrombectomy: Survey of neuro-interventionalists.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2026Article
- Impact of intraprocedural antiplatelet therapy on stent patency and safety after emergent intracranial stenting in acute ischaemic stroke: insights from the RESISTANT registry.European stroke journal · 2026Article
- Tirofiban-induced acute profound thrombocytopenia in endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke: a rare case report.BMC neurology · 2025Article
- Characteristics of acute occlusion of the intracranial vertebral artery and endovascular treatment.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Role and Safety of Tirofiban in Peri-Interventional Antiplatelet Management for Aneurysm Treatment.Clinical neuroradiology · 2025Article
- Antithrombotic Therapy in Carotid Artery and Intracranial Artery Stent.Journal of neuroendovascular therapy · 2025Review
- Elucidating the benefit of drug-eluting stent for symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Surgical neurology international · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIntracranial 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
methodsWe 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.
resultsThirty-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.
conclusionThe results of our study suggest that the application of tirofiban for rescue stenting after failed mechanical thrombectomy is safe.
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.