ArticleBMC neurology2026
Association of low-dose intra-arterial plus intravenous tirofiban with improved functional outcome in branch atheromatous disease-related stroke patients with early neurological deterioration.
Article in BMC neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundManagement of early neurological deterioration (END) in branch atheromatous disease (BAD)-related stroke remains challenging, and intravenous (IV) tirofiban's efficacy is limited. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of low-dose intra-arterial (IA) combined with IV tirofiban in BAD-related stroke patients experiencing END.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed patients with BAD-related stroke who experienced END and were treated with tirofiban between May 2020 and December 2024. Based on the administration route of tirofiban, patients were divided into IA + IV (n = 45) or IV (n = 119) groups. The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion with an excellent functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score 0-1) at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included favorable functional outcome (mRS 0-2), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score at multiple timepoints, and early neurological improvement (ENI). Safety outcomes comprised symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), any ICH, mortality, and other serious adverse events.
resultsAfter adjustment for four prespecified prognostic factors, the IA + IV group had significantly higher rate of excellent functional outcome compared to the IV group (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.99; 95% CI, 1.25-7.16; P = 0.014). This finding was consistent after IPTW adjustment using 10 covariates (OR, 3.68; 95% CI, 1.48-9.14; P = 0.005). The IA + IV group also exhibited significantly lower NIHSS scores at 24 and 72 h and a higher rate of ENI (75.6% vs. 42.9%; adjusted OR, 4.12; 95% CI, 1.85-9.17; P < 0.001). No sICH occurred in either group. The incidence of any ICH (2.2% vs. 0.8%, P = 0.537) and 90-day all-cause mortality (0% vs. 1.7%, P = 0.997) did not differ significantly between IA + IV and IV groups.
conclusionsIn patients with BAD-related stroke experiencing END, adjunctive low-dose IA + IV tirofiban seems associated with higher odds of excellent functional outcome and faster early neurological recovery compared to IV tirofiban alone. The incidence of safety-related adverse events in this study was low; however, due to limited statistical power, the true safety profile requires further validation. Given the limitations of non-randomized design, procedural confounding, and selection bias, further high-level clinical studies are warranted to validate these findings.
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.