目的 探讨盐酸替罗非班氯化钠注射液治疗卒中预警综合征的有效性及安全性。方法 2015-01—2018-03沈阳维康医院收治卒中预警综合征患者12例,给予盐酸替罗非班氯化钠注射液治疗。另收集2010-01—2014-12治疗的卒中预警综合征患者10例为对照组,给予阿司匹林及氯吡格雷双联抗血小板聚集治疗。观察2组患者用药后TIA样症状出现率、脑梗死转化率、出院时NIHSS评分、3个月后mRS评分及不良事件发生率。结果 研究组TIA样症状出现率明显低于对照组(P<0.05),末次症状出现时间也明显少于对照组(P<0.05)。研究组进展为急性脑梗死的比率41.7%,对照组为90%,研究组明显低于对照组(P=0.031)。研究组出院时NIHSS评分(3.11±4.72)分,明显低于对照组的(7.93±5.21)分(P<0.05)。研究组患者3个月后mRS评分(0.64±1.99)分,明显优于对照组的(3.15±1.72)分。2组均未出现症状性颅内出血、其他部位出血及死亡患者。结论 替罗非班能够有效控制卒中预警综合征患者的临床发作,显著缩短持续发作时间,能够有效减少演化为急性脑梗死的患者比率,改善卒中预警综合征患者神经功能缺损及远期临床预后,改善生活质量,安全性良好。
盐酸替罗非班氯化钠注射液治疗卒中预警综合征的疗效观察
李久全
沈阳维康医院神经内科,辽宁 沈阳 110000
【摘要】 目的 探讨盐酸替罗非班氯化钠注射液治疗卒中预警综合征的有效性及安全性。方法 2015-01—2018-03沈阳维康医院收治卒中预警综合征患者12例,给予盐酸替罗非班氯化钠注射液治疗。另收集2010-01—2014-12治疗的卒中预警综合征患者10例为对照组,给予阿司匹林及氯吡格雷双联抗血小板聚集治疗。观察2组患者用药后TIA样症状出现率、脑梗死转化率、出院时NIHSS评分、3个月后mRS评分及不良事件发生率。结果 研究组TIA样症状出现率明显低于对照组(P<0.05),末次症状出现时间也明显少于对照组(P<0.05)。研究组进展为急性脑梗死的比率41.7%,对照组为90%,研究组明显低于对照组(P=0.031)。研究组出院时NIHSS评分(3.11±4.72)分,明显低于对照组的(7.93±5.21)分(P<0.05)。研究组患者3个月后mRS评分(0.64±1.99)分,明显优于对照组的(3.15±1.72)分。2组均未出现症状性颅内出血、其他部位出血及死亡患者。结论 替罗非班能够有效控制卒中预警综合征患者的临床发作,显著缩短持续发作时间,能够有效减少演化为急性脑梗死的患者比率,改善卒中预警综合征患者神经功能缺损及远期临床预后,改善生活质量,安全性良好。
【关键词】 卒中预警综合征;替罗非班;阿司匹林;氯吡格雷;颅内出血;安全性
【中图分类号】 R743.3 【文献标识码】 A 【文章编号】 1673-5110(2019)05-0473-06 DOI:10.12083/SYSJ.2019.05.064
Observation of efficacy of tirofiban hydrochloride and sodium chloride injection in the treatment of stroke warning syndrome
LI Jiuquan
Department of Neurology,Shenyang Weikang Hospital,Shenyang 110000,China
【Abstract】 Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of tirofiban hydrochloride and sodium chloride injection in the treatment of stroke warning syndrome.Methods A total of 12 patients with stroke warning syndrome treated from January 2015 to March 2018 were treated with tirofiban hydrochloride and sodium chloride injection.A total of 10 patients with stroke warning syndrome treated in this department from January 2010 to December 2014 were collected as control group.Patients in control group were treated with aspirin-clopidogrel anti-platelet aggregation.The incidence rate of TIA-like symptoms,conversion rate of cerebral infarction,NIHSS score at discharge,mRS score after 3 months and incidence rate of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups of patients.Results In research group,the incidence rate of TIA-like symptoms was significantly lower than that in control group (P<0.05),and the onset time of the last symptom was significantly shorter than that in control group (P<0.05).The rate of acute cerebral infarction in research group (41.7%) was obviously lower than that in control group (90%) (P=0.031).The NIHSS score at discharge was (3.11±4.72) points in research group,remarkably lower than that in control group (7.93±5.21) (P<0.05).The mRS score after 3 months was (0.64±1.99) points in research group,significantly superior to that in control group (3.15±1.72).No symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage,hemorrhage in other sites and death occurred in both groups.Conclusion Tirofiban can effectively control the clinical attack,shorten the duration of attack significantly,dramatically reduce the ratio of patients suffering from acute cerebral infarction,effectively improve the neurological deficit and long-term clinical prognosis,and increase the quality of life of patients with stroke warning syndrome,which has good safety.
【Key words】 Stroke warning syndrome;Tirofiban;Aspirin;Clopidogrel;Intracranial hemorrhage;Safety
卒中预警综合征(stroke warning syndrome,SWS)是一种脑血管综合征,特点是具有反复发作、刻板发作、持续时间短、逐渐加重,并容易或直至出现相应解剖区域的缺血导致梗死[1],也称血管预警综合征、腔隙预警综合征。即使及时给予干预治疗,仍有相当部分患者进展为完全性脑卒中。沈阳维康医院采用静脉泵入替罗非班治疗卒中预警综合征,取得良好效果。
1 对象与方法
1.1 对象 收集沈阳维康医院2015-01—2018-03治疗的卒中预警综合征患者12例,男8例,女4例,年龄48~81(61.8±13.9)岁;其中内囊预警综合征7例,脑桥预警综合征5例。纳入标准:(1)症状反复发作,24 h内至少发作3次;(2)症状表现为短暂性运动和(或)感觉症状,每次发作刻板;(3)每次症状持续时间<1 h;(4)头颅MRI检查排除急性脑梗死;⑤排除静脉窦血栓形成、癫痫等其他病因所致局灶性症状。排除标准:(1)头部CT或MRI提示颅内出血;(2)MRA、CTA或DSA等血管检查发现存在颈部、颅内责任动脉严重狭窄或闭塞等情况;(3)合并重要脏器功能衰竭;(4)出血体质或合并出血在性疾病者;(5)存在抗栓治疗禁忌证者。另收集沈阳维康医院2010-01—2014-12治疗的卒中预警综合征患者10例为对照组,其中男6例,女4例,年龄45~82(60.9±18.7)岁;其中内囊预警综合征8例,脑桥预警综合征2例。2组性别构成、平均年龄、合并高血压和糖尿病比率等无显著性差异(P>0.05),具有可比性(表1)。
1.2 治疗方案 研究组予盐酸替罗非班氯化钠注射液[欣维宁,远大医药(中国)有限公司,国药准字H20041165]0.5 mg于3 min静脉推注以0.5 mg/h静脉泵入,维持24 h后启动双联抗血小板聚集治疗:硫酸氢氯吡格雷片[波立维,赛诺菲(杭州)制药有限公司,国药准字H20056410]75 mg口服,1次/d;阿司匹林肠溶片(拜阿司匹灵,拜耳医药保健有限公司,国药准字J20130078)100 mg口服,1次/d。双联抗血小板聚集药物2 h后予停用替罗非班。对照组均于入院后立即给予启动双联抗血小板聚集治疗,治疗方法同研究组。2组患者均辅以强化他汀调脂、护胃、控制血压血糖等治疗。
1.3 疗效评估 (1)记录用药后仍出现短暂性脑缺血发作(transient ischemic attack,TIA)样症状发作的患者;(2)72 h后复查头颅MRI,记录发现DWI新发病灶的患者;(3)采用NIHSS评分评估出院时神经功能缺损改善程度;(4)采用改良Rankin评分量表(mRS)评估临床预后情况,改良Rankin量表(mRS)评分≤2分为转归良好,所有患者至少随访3个月。
1.4 不良事件发生情况 通过临床观察及影像学随访判断并记录症状性颅内出血及消化道、尿道、口鼻腔等其他部位出血的发生率以及病死率。
1.5 统计学方法 采用SPSS 20.0软件进行数据分析,构成比或率的比较采用fisher精确检验,2组均数的比较采用独立样本t检验,P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。
2 结果
2.1 2组患者用药后出现TIA样症状发作情况比较 研究组4例再次出现TIA样症状发作,末次症状出现时间为0.5~28 h,平均6.31 h。对照组8例再次出现TIA样症状发作,症状出现时间2~31 h,平均12.49 h。研究组症状出现率明显低于对照组(P<0.05),末次症状出现时间也明显少于对照组(P<0.05)。见表2。
2.2 2组患者进展为急性脑梗死的情况比较 研究组5例复查头颅MRI时发现DWI高信号,进展为急性脑梗死的比率为41.7%;对照组9例复查头颅MRI时发现DWI高信号,进展为急性脑梗死的比率为90%。研究组明显低于对照组(P=0.031)。见表2。
2.3 2组患者出院时NIHSS情况比较 研究组出院时NIHSS评分0~12分,平均3.11分;对照组出院时NIHSS评分0~13分,平均7.93分。研究组明显低于对照组(P<0.05)。见表2。
2.4 2组患者3个月后mRS评分比较 研究组患者3个月后mRS评分(0.64±1.99)分,对照组为(3.15±1.72)分。研究组3个月后临床预后明显优于对照组(P<0.05)。见表2。
2.5 2组不良事件发生情况 2组中均未出现症状性颅内出血、其他部位出血的发生及死亡患者。
表1 2组一般情况比较
Table 1 Comparison of the general situation of the 2 groups
组别 |
n |
性别(男/女) |
年龄/岁 |
高血压[n(%)] |
糖尿病[n(%)] |
研究组 |
12 |
8/4 |
61.8±13.9 |
8(66.7) |
7(58.3) |
对照组 |
10 |
6/4 |
60.9±18.7 |
8(80.0) |
5(50.0) |
t值 |
|
|
-1.634 |
|
|
P值 |
|
1.000* |
0.118# |
0.646* |
1.000* |
注:*采用Fisher精确检验,#采用独立样本t检验
表2 2组TIA样症状发作、进展为急性脑梗死及预后情况比较
Table 2 Comparison of TIA-like symptoms,progression to acute cerebral infarction and prognosis of two groups
组别 |
症状出现率[n(%)] |
症状出现时间 |
进展为急性脑梗死率[n(%)] |
出院时NIHSS情况 |
3个月后mRS评分 |
研究组 |
4/12(33.3) |
6.31±4.28 |
5/12(41.7) |
3.11±4.72 |
0.64±1.99 |
对照组 |
8/10(80.0) |
12.49±6.17 |
9/10(90.0) |
7.93±5.21 |
3.15±1.72 |
t值 |
|
-2.767 |
|
-2.276 |
-3.129 |
P值 |
0.043* |
0.012# |
0.031* |
0.034# |
0.005# |
注:*采用Fisher精确检验,#采用独立样本t检验
3 讨论
卒中预警综合征(SWS)是TIA的特殊形式,根据梗死的解剖部位,给予综合征相应的命名。当短暂偏瘫反复发作,随后内囊出现梗死,称为内囊预警综合征(capsular warning syndrome,CWS)[2];当短暂的事件预示由脑桥被盖区的缺血引起,随后出现相应的梗死,命名为脑桥预警综合征[3];当最初出现胼胝体失连接的症状呈波动变化,随后相应区域出现梗死,命名为胼胝体预警综合征[4]。SWS的发病机制尚不明确,短期内如此刻板、反复地出现缺血发作,提示动脉内在的“血栓”性疾病,而不是隐匿性栓塞[1]。有学者[5-6]认为,SWS可能与穿支动脉低灌注、血流动力学改变、梗死周边去极化、大动脉狭窄等因素相关。此外,研究表明,即使证实存在梗死灶后,CWS患者仍可出现症状波动,可能与各神经功能区之间的联络以及协调障碍有关[7]。SWS早期卒中风险很高,7 d卒中的风险高达60%左右,临床预后相对不良[8]。传统的抗栓(单纯抗血小板或抗凝)疗法对SWS的治疗效果不佳[1,9-10],有学者认为,负荷剂量氯吡格雷与其他抗血小板药联合应用对于SWS的效果显著,前者可能起着关键作用[10-11],但氯吡格雷原型化合物经口服给药后最快也需约45 min后才能够达到平均血浆浓度高峰,此间可能造成不可逆的梗死发生。CHATZIKONSTANTINOU等[12]的研究显示,病情反复波动的TIA患者进展为脑梗死的风险最高,早期静脉溶栓治疗可使这部分患者获益。而TASSI等[1]对18例接受rtPA静脉溶栓治疗的CWS患者的研究显示,rt-PA静脉溶栓治疗未能使患者获益,但安全性却较好。上述研究样本量均较小,研究结论差异较大,且并未列入静脉溶栓适应证内。
卒中预警综合征短时间内反复发作,若不及时有效控制症状,易演变成急性脑梗死,此时选用能够快速起作用且安全有效的药物至关重要。替罗非班是一种非肽类可逆性酪氨酸衍生物,能作用于血小板聚集的最后通路,有效阻断GPⅡb/Ⅲa受体与纤维蛋白原的结合,并能抑制致聚剂(二磷酸腺苷、胶原和凝血酶等)诱导的血小板聚集,从而抑制急性不稳定斑块的血管及脑血管成形术后的血管发生血栓快速形成[13-30]。替罗非班能特异地与(GP)Ⅱb/Ⅲa受体快速结合,抑制血小板聚集,其作用在血小板聚集的最后环节,是作用最强的抗血小板药物,可单独或联合使用治疗急性缺血性脑卒中[14,31-45]。替罗非班在负荷剂量输注后5~10 min即可抑制血小板聚集,且其半衰期短,抗血小板作用可逆,在停药后4 h左右血小板功能迅速恢复[46-50]。目前已被广泛应用于急性缺血性脑卒中介入手术中[51-60]。另外,其安全性好,多项研究证实即使急性缺血性脑卒中行rt-PA静脉溶栓后继贯使用替罗非班,亦不增加出血风险[15]。孙原等[16]研究表明,在急性缺血性脑卒中阿替普酶静脉溶栓后出现再闭塞序贯给予替罗非班治疗能显著减少再闭塞率,改善急性缺血性脑卒中的近期与长期预后,不增加症状性脑出血、死亡等并发症。杨直堂等[17]研究显示,替罗非班改善了脑梗死急性期患者的神经功能,抑制了血小板的活化,提示替罗非班在脑梗死急性期具有很好的疗效。本研究显示,研究组用药后TIA样症状的出现率明显低于对照组,末次症状出现时间也明显缩短,而通过影像随访,研究组中进展为急性脑梗死的比率明显低于对照组,可见替罗非班能够有效控制卒中预警综合征患者的临床发作,显著缩短持续发作时间,并能够有效减少演化为急性脑梗死的患者比率。通过对2组患者出院时NIHSS评分及3个月后mRS评分的比较,提示替罗非班能够有效改善卒中预警综合征患者神经功能缺损及远期临床预后,改善生活质量。2组均未出现症状性颅内出血、其他部位出血及死亡患者,显示替罗非班安全性良好。由于本研究病例数较少,研究结论尚有一定局限性,有待大规模多中心前瞻性研究进一步验证。
4 参考文献
[1] TASSI R,CERASE A,ACAMPA M,et al.Stroke warning syndrome:18 new cases[J].J Neurol Sci,2013,331(1/2):168-171.
[2] DONNAN G A,O'MALLEY H M,QUANG L,et al.The capsular warning syndrome:pathogenesis and clinical features[J].Neurology,1993,43(5):957-962.
[3] MUENGTAWEEPONGSA S,SINGH N N,CRUZFLORES S.Pontine warning syndrome:case series and review of literature[J].J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis,2010,19(5):353-356.
[4] NANDHAGOPAL R,ALASMI A,JOHNSTON W J,et al.Callosal warning syndrome[J].J Neurol Sci,2012,314(1/2):178-180.
[5] 孙亚楠,滕继军,孙凤娇.内囊预警综合征[J].国际脑血管病杂志,2013,21(12):928-932.
[6] 曲长海,王广田,曲方.卒中预警综合征研究进展[J].医学综述,2015,21(3):492-494.
[7] SPRINGER M V,LABOVITZ D L.The capsular warning syndrome reconsidered[J].Cerebrovasc Dis,2013,36(2):152.
[8] PAUL N L,SIMONI M,CHANDRATHEVA A,et al.Population-based study of capsular warning syndrome and prognosis after early recurrent TIA[J].J Vasc Surg,2013,57(1):1 356-1 362.
[9] LALIVE P H,MAYOR I,SZTAJZEL R.The Role of Blood Pressure in Lacunar Strokes Preceded by TIAs[J].Cerebrovasc Dis,2003,16(1):88-90.
[10] BENE A D,PALUMBO V,LAMASSA M,et al.Progressive lacunar stroke:Review of mechanisms,prognostic features,and putative treatments[J].Int J Stroke,2012,7(4):321.
[11] ASIL T,IR N,KARADUMAN F,et al.Combined antithrombotic treatment with aspirin and clopidogrel for patients with capsular warning syndrome:a case report[J].Neurologist,2012,18(2):68.
[12] CHATZIKONSTANTINOU A,WILLMANN O,JÄGER T,et al.Transient ischemic attack patients with fluctuations are at highest risk for early stroke[J].Cerebrovasc Dis,2009,27(6):594.
[13] 孙钦建,郑兴月,屈传强.替罗非班在缺血性卒中溶栓和血管内治疗中的应用[J].国际脑血管病杂志,2014,22(8):620-624.
[14] KRAFT P,SCHUHMANN M K,FLURI F,et al.Efficacy and Safety of Platelet Glycoprotein Receptor Blockade in Aged and Comorbid Mice With Acute Experimental Stroke[J].Stroke,2015,46(12):3 502-3 506.
[15] LI W,LIN L,ZHANG M,et al.Safety and Preliminary Efficacy of Early Tirofiban Treatment After Alteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients[J].Stroke,2016,47(10):2 649.
[16] 孙原,石秋艳,李艳玲,到.替罗非班治疗阿替普酶静脉溶栓后再闭塞的疗效观察[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2018,21(1):40-43.
[17] 杨直堂,苏进营,刘志军,等.替罗非班在脑梗死不同时期的安全性及对血小板活化的影响[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2018,21(20):2 217-2 221.
[18] YANG M,HUO X,MIAO Z,et al.Platelet Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa ReceptorInhibitor Tirofiban in Acute Ischemic Stroke[J].Drugs,2019,79(5):515-529.DOI:10.1007/s40265-019-01078-0.
[19] NIU J,DING Y,ZHAI T,et al.Theefficacy and safety of tirofiban for patients with acute ischemic stroke:Aprotocol for systematic review and a meta-analysis[J].Medicine (Baltimore),2019,98(9):e14673.DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000014673.
[20] PAN X,ZHENG D,ZHENG Y,et al.Safety andefficacy of tirofiban combined with endovascular treatment in acute ischaemicstroke[J].Eur J Neurol,2019.DOI:10.1111/ene.13946.
[21] LIU J,SHI Q,SUN Y,et al.Efficacy of TirofibanAdministered at Different Time Points after Intravenous Thrombolytic Therapy withAlteplase in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke[J].J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis,2019,28(4):1 126-1 132.DOI:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2018.12.044.
[22] ZHANG S,HAO Y,TIAN X,et al.Safety of Intra-Arterial TirofibanAdministration in Ischemic Stroke Patients after Unsuccessful MechanicalThrombectomy[J].J Vasc Interv Radiol,2019,30(2):141.e1-147.e1.DOI:10.1016/j.jvir.2018.08.021.
[23] ANDERSON G L,OSBORN J L,NEI S D,et al.Comparison of In-Hospital Bleeding and Cardiovascular Events with High-Dose BolusTirofiban and Shortened Infusion to Short-Duration Eptifibatide as AdjunctiveTherapy for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention[J].Am J Cardiol,2019,123(1):44-49.DOI:10.1016/j.amjcard.2018.09.029.
[24] GRUBER P,HLAVICA M,BERBERAT J,et al.Acute administration of tirofiban versus aspirin in emergentcarotid artery stenting[J].Interv Neuroradiol,2019,25(2):219-224.DOI:10.1177/1591019918808777.
[25] YU T,LIN Y,JIN A,et al.Safety and Efficiency ofLow Dose Intra-arterial Tirofiban in Mechanical Thrombectomy During AcuteIschemic Stroke[J].Curr Neurovasc Res,2018,15(2):145-150.DOI:10.2174/1567202615666180605104931.
[26] LEE J I,GLIEM M,GERDES G,et al.Safety of bridging antiplatelet therapy with the gpIIb-IIIa inhibitortirofiban after emergency stenting in stroke[J].PLoS One,2017,12(12):e0190218.DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0190218.
[27] LIN L,LI W,LIU C C,et al.Safety and preliminary efficacy of intravenoustirofiban in acute ischemic stroke patient without arterial occlusion onneurovascular imaging studies[J].J Neurol Sci,2017,383:175-179.DOI:10.1016/j.jns.2017.10.041.
[28] ZHAO W,CHE R,SHANG S,et al.Low-Dose Tirofiban ImprovesFunctional Outcome in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated With EndovascularThrombectomy[J].Stroke,2017,48(12):3 289-3 294.DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.019193.
[29] ZHAO H,ZHANG J,GU D,et al.Tirofiban facilitates thereperfusion process during endovascular thrombectomy in ICAS[J].Exp Ther Med,2017,14(4):3 314-3 318.DOI:10.3892/etm.2017.4856.
[30] ZI-LIANG W,XIAO-DONG L,TIAN-XIAO L,et al.Intravenousadministration of tirofiban versus loading dose of oral clopidogrel forpreventing thromboembolism in stent-assisted coiling of intracranial aneurysms[J].Int J Stroke,2017,12(5):553-559.DOI:10.1177/1747493016677989.
[31] BARACCHINI C,FARINA F,SOSO M,et al.Stentriever Thrombectomy Failure:AChallenge in Stroke Management[J].World Neurosurg,2017,103:57-64.DOI:10.1016/j.wneu.2017.03.070.
[32] LI W,LIN L,ZHANG M,et al.Safety and Preliminary Efficacy of Early Tirofiban Treatment AfterAlteplase in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients[J].Stroke,2016,47(10):2 649-2 651.DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.014413.
[33] MANSUR ADE P,ROGGERIO A,TAKADA J Y,et al.Genemutations of platelet glycoproteins and response to tirofiban in acute coronarysyndrome[J].Sao Paulo Med J,2016,134(3):199-204.DOI:10.1590/1516-3180.2015.00650808.
[34] LIANG X D,WANG Z L,LI T X,et al.Safety andefficacy of a new prophylactic tirofiban protocol without oral intraoperativeantiplatelet therapy for endovascular treatment of ruptured intracranialaneurysms[J].J Neurointerv Surg,2016,8(11):1 148-1 153.DOI:10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-012055.
[35] ZHU Y Q,ZHANG Y J,RUAN H L,et al.Safety of tirofiban forpatients with acute ischemic stroke in routine clinical practice[J].Exp Ther Med,2015,10(1):169-174.
[36] LI T T,FAN M L,HOU S X,et al.A novel snake venom-derived GPIb antagonist,anfibatide,protects mice from acute experimental ischaemic stroke and reperfusion injury[J].Br J Pharmacol,2015,172(15):3 904-3 916.DOI:10.1111/bph.13178.
[37] HAN Y,GUO J,ZHENG Y,et al.Bivalirudin vs heparin with or without tirofiban during primarypercutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction:the BRIGHTrandomized clinical trial[J].JAMA,2015,313(13):1 336-1 346.DOI:10.1001/jama.2015.2323.
[38] SEO J H,JEONG H W,KIM S T,et al.Adjuvant Tirofiban Injection ThroughDeployed Solitaire Stent As a Rescue Technique After failed MechanicalThrombectomy in Acute Stroke[J].Neurointervention,2015,10(1):22-27.DOI:10.5469/neuroint.2015.10.1.22.
[39] KANG D H,KIM Y W,HWANG Y H,et al.Instant reocclusionfollowing mechanical thrombectomy of in situ thromboocclusion and the role oflow-dose intra-arterial tirofiban[J].Cerebrovasc Dis,2014,37(5):350-355.DOI:10.1159/000362435.
[40] MRDOVIC I,SAVIC L,LASICA R,et al.Efficacy and safety of tirofiban-supported primarypercutaneous coronary intervention in patients pretreated with 600 mgclopidogrel:Results of propensity analysis using the Clinical Center of SerbiaSTEMI Register[J].Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care,2014,3(1):56-66.DOI:10.1177/2048872613514013.
[41] KELLERT L,HAMETNER C,STAMPFL S.Response to letter regarding article,”endovascular stroke therapy:tirofiban is associated with risk of fatalintracerebral hemorrhage and poor outcome”[J].Stroke,2013,44(9):e113.DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002354.
[42] BOGDAHN U,SCHLACHETZKI F,SCHUIERER G.Letter by Schlachetzki et alregarding article,”endovascular stroke therapy:tirofiban is associated withrisk of fatal intracerebral hemorrhage and poor outcome”[J].Stroke,2013,44(9):e112.DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002340.
[43] KELLERT L,HAMETNER C,ROHDE S,et al.Endovascular stroke therapy:tirofiban is associated with risk of fatalintracerebral hemorrhage and poor outcome[J].Stroke,2013,44(5):1 453-1 455.DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.000502.
[44] SEITZ R J,SUKIENNIK J,SIEBLER M.Outcome after systemic thrombolysis ispredicted by age and stroke severity:an open label experience with recombinanttissue plasminogen activator and tirofiban[J].Neurol Int,2012,4(2):e9.DOI:10.4081/ni.2012.e9.
[45] KIM J W,JEON P,KIM G M,et al.Local intraarterialtirofiban after formation of anterograde flow in patients with acute ischemicstroke:preliminary experience and short term follow-up results[J].Clin NeurolNeurosurg,2012,114(10):1 316-1 319.DOI:10.1016/j.clineuro.2012.04.022.
[46] IHN Y K,SUNG J H,KIM B S.Intravenous Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitor(Tirofiban) Followed by Low-Dose Intra-Arterial Urokinase and MechanicalThrombolysis for the Treatment of Acute Stroke[J].Neuroradiol J,2011,24(6):907-913.
[47] BAIK S K,OH S J,PARK K P,et al.Intra-arterial tirofiban infusion forpartial recanalization with stagnant flow in hyperacute cerebral ischemic stroke[J].Interv Neuroradiol,2011,17(4):442-451.
[48] SIEBLER M,HENNERICI M G,SCHNEIDER D,et al.Safety of Tirofiban in acute Ischemic Stroke:the SaTIS trial[J].Stroke,2011,42(9):2 388-2 392.DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.599662.
[49] KWON J H,SHIN S H,WEON Y C,et al.Intra-arterial adjuvanttirofiban after unsuccessful intra-arterial thrombolysis of acute ischemicstroke:preliminary experience in 16 patients[J].Neuroradiology,2011,53(10):779-785.DOI:10.1007/s00234-011-0939-y.
[50] IHN Y K,SUNG J H,KIM B S.Intravenous Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor(Tirofiban) Followed by Low-dose Intra-arterial Urokinase and MechanicalThrombolysis for the Treatment of Stroke[J].Neuroradiol J,2011,24(1):145-151.
[51] TORGANO G,ZECCA B,MONZANI V,et al.Effect of intravenoustirofiban and aspirin in reducing short-term and long-term neurologic deficit in patients with ischemic stroke:a double-blind randomized trial[J].Cerebrovasc Dis,2010,29(3):275-281.DOI:10.1159/000275503.
[52] PHILIPPS J,THOMALLA G,GLAHN J,et al.Treatment ofprogressive stroke with tirofiban--experience in 35 patients[J].Cerebrovasc Dis,2009,28(5):435-438.DOI:10.1159/000235987.
[53] BRANDL U,JCKLE H,ERHARDT M,et al.Reducedfibrin deposition and intravascular thrombosis in hDAF transgenic pig heartsperfused with tirofiban[J].Transplantation,2007,84(12):1 667-1 676.DOI:10.1097/01.tp.0000295742.45413.dc.
[54] BUKOW S C,DAFFERTSHOFER M,HENNERICI M G.Tirofiban for the treatment ofischaemic stroke[J].Expert Opin Pharmacother,2006,7(1):73-79.
[55] MANGIAFICO S,CELLERINI M,NENCINi P,et al.Intravenousglycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (tirofiban) followed by intra-arterial urokinase and mechanical thrombolysis in stroke[J].AJNR Am J Neuroradiol,2005,26(10):2 595-2 601.
[56] MANGIAFICO S,CELLERINI M,NENCINI P,et al.Intravenoustirofiban with intra-arterial urokinase and mechanical thrombolysis in stroke:preliminary experience in 11 cases[J].Stroke,2005,36(10):2 154-2 158.
[57] VALGIMIGLI M,PERCOCO G,MALAGUTTI P,et al.Tirofiban andsirolimus-eluting stent vs abciximab and bare-metal stent for acute myocardialinfarction:a randomized trial[J].JAMA,2005,293(17):2 109-2 117.
[57] STRAUB S,JUNGHANS U,JOVANOVIC V,et al.Systemicthrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator and tirofiban in acutemiddle cerebral artery occlusion[J].Stroke,2004,35(3):705-709.
[59] SEITZ R J,HAMZAVI M,JUNGHANS U,et al.Thrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator and tirofiban instroke:preliminary observations[J].Stroke,2003,34(8):1 932-1 935.
[60] JUNGHANS U,SEITZ R J,AULICH A,et al.Bleeding risk oftirofiban,a nonpeptide GPIIb/IIIa platelet receptor antagonist in progressivestroke:an open pilot study[J].Cerebrovasc Dis,2001,12(4):308-312.
(收稿2018-10-19)
本文责编:夏保军
本文引用信息:李久全.盐酸替罗非班氯化钠注射液治疗卒中预警综合征的疗效观察[J].中国实用神经疾病杂志,2019,22(5):473-478.DOI:10.12083/SYSJ.2019.05.064
Reference information:LI Jiuquan.Observation of efficacy of tirofiban hydrochloride and sodium chloride injection in the treatment of stroke warning syndrome[J].Chinese Journal of Practical Nervous Diseases,2019,22(5):473-478.DOI:10.12083/SYSJ.2019.05.064