Efficacy and safety of tirofiban plus recombinant tissue plasminogen activator versus recombinant tissue plasminogen activator alone in acute ischemic stroke patients: a meta-analysis

Abstract

Objective

Tirofiban plus recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) shows good efficacy and safety in treating acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients, but there is a lack of comprehensive assessment. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of rtPA plus tirofiban with rtPA alone in AIS patients.

Methods

This meta-analysis retrieved studies comparing rtPA intravenous thrombolysis followed by tirofiban (rtPA+T group) versus rtPA intravenous thrombolysis alone (rtPA group) for AIS patients in Excerpt Medica Database, Web of Science, Cochrane, PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and SinoMed until March 2024.

Results

Twenty studies with 2048 AIS patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis. National Institute of Health stroke scale (NIHSS) score after treatment was lower in the rtPA+T group than the rtPA group [standardized mean differences (SMD)=-1.41; 95 % confidence interval (CI)=-1.83, -0.98; P<0.001]. The proportion of AIS patients achieving a favorable functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score ≤2) was increased in the rtPA+T group versus the rtPA group [relative risk (RR)=1.13; 95 % CI=1.05, 1.21; P=0.001]. The incidence of re-occlusion was lower in the rtPA+T group than in the rtPA group (RR=0.24; 95 % CI=0.10, 0.59; P=0.002), but the incidence of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) (RR=0.85; 95 % CI=0.51, 1.43), symptomatic ICH (RR=1.10; 95 % CI=0.43, 2.84), and mortality (RR=1.39; 95 % CI=0.53, 3.65) was not different between the two groups (all P>0.05). The stability assessed by sensitivity analysis was good, and no publication bias was found.

Conclusion

rtPA plus tirofiban achieves superior efficacy with comparable safety profiles compared to rtPA alone in AIS patients.