Intracoronary administration of tirofiban during percutaneous coronary intervention facilitates patients with acute coronary syndrome.

We assessed the efficacy and safety of tirofiban intracoronary versus intravenous administration during percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with acute coronary syndrome. The databases of PubMed, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and WanFang Database were retrieved. A total of 437 articles were found, according to inclusive and exclusive criteria, 13 of which were finally included. Compared with subjects with intravenous administration, those with intracoronary administration were more likely to reach thrombolysis in myocardial infarction trial grade 3 flow (relative risk = 1.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.11-1.22), improve left ventricular ejection fraction (Standardized mean difference = 0.65, 95% confidence interval: 0.20-1.11). Intracoronary administration resulted in a reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular events at 30-day follow-up (relative risk = 0.47, 95% confidence interval: 0.34-0.65). However, incidence of bleeding complications was not statistically significant between two groups (relative risk = 0.76, 95% confidence interval: 0.55-1.04). Intracoronary administration of tirofiban can be more effective in increasing coronary blood flow and microvascular perfusion, more effective in improving postoperative myocardial reperfusion, more significantly in reducing the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events at 30-day's follow-up and improving the prognosis after percutaneous coronary intervention without increasing the risk of bleeding.