Purpose: Intracranial 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 Methods: We 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. Results: Thirty-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. Conclusion: The results of our study suggest that the application of tirofiban for rescue stenting after failed mechanical thrombectomy is safe.

Introduction: Emergent stenting of the extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) in stroke patients requires antiplatelet therapy to prevent in-stent thrombosis with a higher risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Aim of the Study: Assess the efficacy and safety of emergent carotid stenting with intravenous tirofiban in acute ischemic stroke patients. Methods: Primary endpoint: symptomatic hemorrhage. Secondary endpoints: 90-day functional outcome and mortality. Results: Of the 62 patients, 21 (34%) received tirofiban as a single antiplatelet, and 41 (66%) received combined therapy. Premedication with anticoagulants and antiplatelets was significantly more frequent in the tirofiban-only group. The rate of symptomatic haemorrhage was significantly lower in the tirofiban-only group than in the combined group (4.8% vs. 27%, p = 0.046). The patients with tirofiban alone had a significantly better functional outcome at day 90 than the combined group (52% vs. 24%, p = 0.028). Mortality was equal (24%) in both groups. Pre-interventional NIHSS score (p = 0.003), significant blood pressure fluctuations (p = 0.012), tandem occlusion (p = 0.023), and thrombolysis (p = 0.044) showed relevant influence on the rate of symptomatic hemorrhage in the entire patient cohort. Conclusions: A single antiplatelet therapy with tirofiban regardless of the premedication may improve the functional outcome in patients with stroke due to acute extracranial carotid lesion and emergent carotid stenting with lower rates of serious intracranial haemorrhage. For patients with high pre-interventional NIHSS score, tandem occlusion and after pre-interventional thrombolysis, caution is advised. Additionally, strict blood pressure monitoring should be conducted during the first 72 h after intervention.

Background: Tirofiban is administered for the treatment of aneurysms in cases of thromboembolic complications, as well as in cases of acute stenting or flow-diverter implantation required within the scope of aneurysm treatment. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of tirofiban in this group of patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing aneurysm treatment and receiving peri-interventional tirofiban administration at our institution between 2009 and 2019. Results: A total of 105 patients were included, with 61% women and 39% men (mean age = 53 years, IQR: 44–60 years). Sixty-seven patients underwent emergency aneurysm treatment, and thirty-eight were treated electively. Hemorrhagic events occurred in 22% (15/67) of the patients treated acutely, with 7.46% (5/67) exhibiting symptoms. Patients undergoing elective aneurysm treatment experienced no hemorrhagic events (p = 0.002). Among the 35 patients who required an external ventricular drain (EVD), 22.86% (8/35) developed EVD-related hemorrhages; however, none were symptomatic (p = 0.007). Of the five patients who required a craniotomy, two experienced significant bleeding, and one experienced non-significant craniotomy-related bleeding (p = 0.20). Conclusion: Tirofiban may be safe for use during peri-interventional complications or emergency stenting in aneurysm treatment. However, caution is necessary when craniotomy is required. In elective aneurysm treatments, administering Tirofiban in response to periprocedural complications appears to be safe.