ArticleFrontiers in neurology
Real-world experience with RESCUE BT2 tirofiban protocol versus standard care for select patients with acute ischemic stroke at a United States comprehensive stroke center: a single-center retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Tirofiban, a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitor, has shown promise in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) without medium- or large-vessel occlusion. The RESCUE BT2 trial demonstrated improved functional outcomes with IV tirofiban versus aspirin, but was conducted predominantly in Han Chinese populations, limiting generalizability to U.S. practice. This study evaluated the safety, operational feasibility, and exploratory clinical associations of a RESCUE BT2-based tirofiban protocol at a U.S. comprehensive stroke center. Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study compared patients treated with tirofiban per RESCUE BT2 protocol (Nov 2023-June 2025) with a historical standard care cohort meeting similar eligibility criteria (Jan 2021-Oct 2023). Primary outcomes focused on safety, including any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic ICH, extracranial bleeding, thrombocytopenia, and mortality. Exploratory clinical outcomes included NIHSS trajectories, discharge modified Rankin Scale (mRS), discharge disposition, hospital length of stay, and available 90-day mRS. Multivariate regression models adjusted for baseline severity, early therapies, and neurological severity at the clinical decision point. Propensity score matching and/or multiple imputation were conducted as sensitivity analyses, and the results were interpreted as exploratory. Results: Seventy-four patients were included (32 tirofiban, 42 standard care). No patients in the tirofiban group developed symptomatic or asymptomatic ICH, and no thrombocytopenia was observed. Extracranial bleeding occurred in 3 patients (9.4%). In adjusted exploratory analyses, tirofiban was associated with lower discharge NIHSS ( Conclusion: Implementation of a RESCUE BT2-based IV tirofiban protocol in a U.S. comprehensive stroke center was feasible and demonstrated a favorable safety profile in carefully selected AIS patients. Exploratory associations with improved neurological trajectories warrant prospective evaluation in larger multicenter studies.
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.