Intravenous Tirofiban Versus Alteplase Before Endovascular Treatment in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Pooled Analysis of the DEVT and RESCUE BT Trials.

BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous tirofiban versus alteplase before endovascular treatment (EVT) in acute ischemic stroke patients with intracranial large vessel occlusion. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis using data from 2 multicenter, randomized trials: the DEVT trial (Direct Endovascular Treatment for Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke) from May 2018 to May 2020 and the RESCUE BT trial (Intravenous Tirofiban Before Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke) from October 2018 to October 2021. Patients with acute intracranial large vessel occlusion within 4.5 hours from last known well were dichotomized into 2 groups: tirofiban plus EVT versus alteplase bridging with EVT. The primary outcome was functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2) at 90 days. Safety outcomes included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and 3-month mortality. Multivariable logistic regression (adjusting for baseline systolic blood pressure, occlusion site, onset-to-puncture time, anesthesia, and first choice of EVT) and propensity score overlap weighting (balance in demographic covariates, stroke characteristics, and initial management between groups) were performed. RESULTS: One-hundred and eighteen alteplase-treated patients in the DEVT trial and 98 tirofiban-treated patients in the RESCUE BT trial were included (median age, 70 years; 115 [53.2%] men). The rate of functional independence was 60.2% in the tirofiban group compared with 46.6% in the alteplase group (adjusted odds ratio, 1.25 [95% CI, 0.60-2.63]). Compared with alteplase, tirofiban was not associated with increased risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (6.8% versus 9.2%; P=0.51) and mortality (17.8% versus 19.4%; P=0.76). The propensity score overlap weighting analyses showed consistent outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with intracranial large vessel occlusion within 4.5 hours of onset, tirofiban plus EVT was comparable to alteplase bridging with EVT regarding the efficacy and safety outcomes. These findings should be interpreted as preliminary and require confirmation in a randomized trial. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.chictr.org.cn; Unique identifiers: ChiCTR-IOR-17013568 and ChiCTR-INR-17014167.

Methylprednisolone as Adjunct to Endovascular Thrombectomy for Large-Vessel Occlusion Stroke: The MARVEL Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: It is uncertain whether intravenous methylprednisolone improves outcomes for patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large-vessel occlusion (LVO) undergoing endovascular thrombectomy. Objective: To assess the efficacy and adverse events of adjunctive intravenous low-dose methylprednisolone to endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke secondary to LVO. Design, Setting, and Participants: This investigator-initiated, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was implemented at 82 hospitals in China, enrolling 1680 patients with stroke and proximal intracranial LVO presenting within 24 hours of time last known to be well. Recruitment took place between February 9, 2022, and June 30, 2023, with a final follow-up on September 30, 2023. Interventions: Eligible patients were randomly assigned to intravenous methylprednisolone (n = 839) at 2 mg/kg/d or placebo (n = 841) for 3 days adjunctive to endovascular thrombectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy outcome was disability level at 90 days as measured by the overall distribution of the modified Rankin Scale scores (range, 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]). The primary safety outcomes included mortality at 90 days and the incidence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage within 48 hours. Results: Among 1680 patients randomized (median age, 69 years; 727 female [43.3%]), 1673 (99.6%) completed the trial. The median 90-day modified Rankin Scale score was 3 (IQR, 1-5) in the methylprednisolone group vs 3 (IQR, 1-6) in the placebo group (adjusted generalized odds ratio for a lower level of disability, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.96-1.25]; P = .17). In the methylprednisolone group, there was a lower mortality rate (23.2% vs 28.5%; adjusted risk ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.71-0.98]; P = .03) and a lower rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (8.6% vs 11.7%; adjusted risk ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.55-0.99]; P = .04) compared with placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with acute ischemic stroke due to LVO undergoing endovascular thrombectomy, adjunctive methylprednisolone added to endovascular thrombectomy did not significantly improve the degree of overall disability. Trial Registration: ChiCTR.org.cn Identifier: ChiCTR2100051729.

Efficacy and safety of tirofiban combined with endovascular therapy for basilar artery occlusion stroke due to large artery atherosclerosis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adjuvant tirofiban in patients with acute basilar artery occlusion due to large-artery atherosclerotic (LAA) receiving endovascular therapy (EVT). METHODS: This was a non-randomized, multicenter study using data from the Endovascular Treatment for Acute BASILAR Artery Occlusion (BASILAR) registry. Patients with acute basilar artery occlusion due to LAA within 24h of symptom onset who underwent EVT were included. Patients were divided into tirofiban and non-tirofiban groups according to whether tirofiban was used. The primary outcome was the ordinal modified Rankin scale score at 90 days. Safety outcomes were mortality within 90 days and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) within 48 h. RESULTS: A total of 417 patients were included, of whom 275 patients were in the tirofiban group and 142 patients in the non-tirofiban group. Compared with patients in the non-tirofiban group, patients in the tirofiban group were associated with a favorable shift in functional outcome at 90 days (6[4-6] vs 5 [2-6]; adjusted common OR, 2.51; 95 % CI, 1.64-3.83). The mortality was lower in the tirofiban group than the non-tirofiban group (40.7 % vs 58.5 %; adjusted OR, 0.35; 95 % CI, 0.21-0.56). The rate of sICH was 12.2 % in the non-tirofiban group and 5.2 % in the tirofiban group (adjusted OR, 0.37; 95 % CI, 0.17-0.80; P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Tirofiban plus EVT might improve functional outcomes with a good safety for patients with acute basilar artery occlusion due to LAA. The results need to be confirmed in a randomized trial.

Predictors of futile recanalization in basilar artery occlusion patients undergoing endovascular treatment: a post hoc analysis of the ATTENTION trial.

Background: Few studies have focused on factors associated with futile recanalization in patients with an acute basilar artery occlusion (BAO) that was treated with modern endovascular therapy (EVT). The aim of this study was to explore the factors associated with futile recanalization in patients with an acute BAO presented within 12 h. Methods: This is a post-hoc analysis of the ATTENTION trial (The Trial of Endovascular Treatment of Acute Basilar-Artery Occlusion, ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04751708). Demographics, clinical characteristics, acute stroke workflow interval times, and imaging characteristics were compared between the futile recanalization and favorable recanalization groups. The favorable outcome was defined as a modified Rankin scale (mRS) score of 0-3 at 90 days, successful reperfusion was defined as thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (TICI) 2b and 3 on the final angiogram, and futile recanalization was defined as failure to achieve a favorable outcome despite successful reperfusion. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify the predictors of futile recanalization. Results: In total, 185 patients were included in the final analysis: 89 (48.1%) patients had futile recanalization and 96 (51.9%) patients had favorable recanalization. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.08, p = 0.01) and diabetes mellitus (OR 3.35, 95% CI 1.40 to 8.01, p = 0.007) were independent predictors of futile recanalization. Conclusion: Futile recanalization occurred in nearly half of patients with acute BAO following endovascular treatment. Old age and diabetes mellitus were identified as independent predictors of futile recanalization after endovascular therapy for acute BAO.