Treatment of hemiplegic stroke warning syndrome: comparison between tirofiban and aspirin combined with clopidogrel
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-4165.2021.06.005
- VernacularTitle:偏瘫型卒中预警综合征的治疗：替罗非班与阿司匹林联合氯吡格雷的比较
- Author:
Huakun LIU
1
;
Peng WANG
;
Yusen CAI
;
Xingyue ZHENG
;
Haotian ZHAO
;
Yafei ZHOU
;
Feng GAO
;
Haiyang WANG
;
Jianfeng CHU
;
Zhongrui YAN
Author Information
1. 济宁市第一人民医院神经内科 272011
- Keywords:
Ischemic attack, transient;
Internal capsule;
Stroke;
Brain ischemia;
Tirofiban;
Treatment outcome
- From:
International Journal of Cerebrovascular Diseases
2021;29(6):426-431
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the clinical safety and efficacy of tirofiban in the treatment of hemiplegic stroke warning syndrome.Methods:Patients with hemiplegic stroke warning syndrome admitted to Jining First People's Hospital without receiving intravenous thrombolysis from January 2018 to May 2020 were enrolled retrospectively. Some patients were given tirofiban intravenous infusion for at least 24 h in acute phase, then received oral antiplatelet therapy (tirofiban group); some only received aspirin+ clopidogrel dual antiplatelet therapy (control group). The primary endpoint was muscle strength at the paralytic side and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score at day 7 after onset. The secondary endpoint was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 3 months after onset, and ≤2 was defined as good clinical outcome. The safety endpoint was the bleeding events during treatment. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine the independent influencing factors of clinical outcome. Results:A total of 30 patients with hemiplegic stroke warning syndrome were enrolled, including 19 (63.3%) in the tirofiban group and 11 (36.7%) in the control group. There was no significant difference in baseline clinical data between the two groups, and no drug-related bleeding complications occurred during treatment. The muscle strength at paralytic side and NIHSS score at day 7 after onset, NIHSS score at discharge and good clinical outcome rate at 3 months in the tirofiban group were significantly better than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (all P<0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that tirofiban was an independent protective factor for good outcome after adjusting the NIHSS score at the beginning of treatment (odds ratio 0.040, 95% confidence interval 0.040-0.449; P=0.009). Conclusions:Tirofiban is safe and effective in the treatment of patients with hemiplegic stroke warning syndrome in acute phase. It can effectively block the progress of the disease, improve the outcome of patients, and will not increase the risk of bleeding.
