Surgical revascularization is the standard treatment for MMD [2, 3]. Establishment and maintenance of bypass patency are essential for the procedure to be successful and for patient morbidity and mortality to be reduced[13]. Acute thrombus formation is a complication of direct revascularization surgery[6]. We compared three distinct thrombus removal methods.
The initial approach involved re-anastomosis after thrombus removal. This method offers a clear view of thrombus color and location during surgery. Using forceps for extraction is more direct and efficient. Furthermore, the anastomosis was re-opened immediately in the case of non-thrombotic closures, such as those caused by suture-related constriction. Anastomotic sutures were partially dissected In the second method, and tirofiban was injected directly into the temporal artery branch and intra-anastomotic space after comprehensive lavage. This approach reduces surgical duration and, compared to direct thrombectomy, results in a lesser degree of injury.
As demonstrated in the literature review, most patients choose to have the suture removed at the anastomotic site.[6, 12, 14, 16] Kimura T employed direct surgical embolectomy to rescue 12 patients who developed acute thrombi. Of the 12 patients, 11 had intraoperative reperfusion[12]. Undoubtedly, the outcomes following suture removal at the anastomotic site have been exceptionally positive. However, the first and second approaches necessitate re-opening and re-anastomosing, which presents a challenge to the skills and experience of the surgeon and may expose the patients to the risk of recurrence of thrombosis due to similar endothelial damage or other pathological triggers. The third approach did not disrupt the sutures at the anastomosis. Therefore, compared to the first and second methods, it avoids potential vascular endothelial damage and demonstrates the efficacy of tirofiban in eliminating acute thrombosis. Moreover, this approach minimizes the procedural complexities at the anastomotic site and avoids vascular spasms after repeated manipulations and vessel narrowing following multiple sutures. However, vigilance is necessary for intraoperative and postoperative bleeding complications. In patients subjected to this method, we did not observe bleeding complications associated with tirofiban.
Our drug selection is primarily determined by the mechanisms underlying thrombus formation[17]. The recruitment and activation of circulating platelets and the formation of an initial platelet plug (which is frequently observed intraoperatively in white) occur in response to initial tissue injury [15, 17, 18].Tirofiban is a non-peptide platelet GP IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist, which prevents the aggregation of platelets at atherosclerotic sites by inhibiting the binding of fibrinogen to platelets.[19] Hyun-Seung Kang et al. used microcatheter-guided selective intra-arterial tirofiban infusion to manage thrombi or emboli occurring during aneurysm procedures. Among 25 patients with aneurysms, 24 achieved successful revascularization without any associated bleeding complications[20].
Rt-PA, a thrombolytic agent, degrades fibrin, thereby exerting its thrombolytic effect [21], hence its limited efficacy on white thrombosis. Due to the highly destructive nature of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) as a complication of rt-PA therapy[22], we refrained from selecting rt-PA. Takeshi Mikami, Jin Woo Bae, Takahashi JC, et al. have employed heparin intraoperatively to manage acute thrombosis.6,14,16 Additionally, we conducted studies involving the administration of heparin through anastomosis in patients. However, as the thrombus was unresolved, we refrained from using heparin in subsequent studies.
Due to the potential risk of intracranial bleeding associated with other medications, the suboptimal effects post-administration of heparin, and the recognized safety and efficacy of tirofiban when applied intracranially, we opted for tirofiban to manage acute thrombosis during STA-MCA procedures.
Limitations
The small number of patients who have undergone treatment with this technique and the rarity of other studies may lead to an insufficient evaluation of the effectiveness, limitations, and safety of this technique. Higher case series are essential to evaluate this technique further.