期刊文献+
任意字段
题名或关键词
题名
关键词
文摘
作者
第一作者
机构
刊名
分类号
参考文献
作者简介
基金资助
栏目信息

肝素联合替罗非班、比伐卢定两种抗凝方案对STEMI病人PCI术后MACE、出血事件及P-选择素水平的影响 被引量：7

下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的探讨肝素联合替罗非班、比伐卢定方案对ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)病人经皮冠状动脉介入术(PCI)后不良心血管事件(MACE)、出血事件及P-选择素水平的影响。方法选取2015年3月-2017年12月收治并行PCI术的STEMI病人共150例,以随机数字表法分为对照组(75例)和观察组(75例)。分别采用肝素联合替罗非班和比伐卢定方案进行抗凝,比较两组术后30 d MACE和出血事件发生率、围术期P-选择素水平。结果两组术后30 d MACE发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组术后美国出血学术研究会出血标准(BRAC)2~5型出血事件发生率低于对照组(P<0.05);两组术后BRAC3~5型出血事件和获得性血小板减少症发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组术中和术后P-选择素水平均低于对照组(P<0.05);对照组术中和术后P-选择素水平均高于术前(P<0.05)。结论相较于肝素联合替罗非班方案,比伐卢定方案用于PCI术STEMI病人抗凝可有效降低BRAC2~5型出血事件发生率,下调P-选择素水平,且未增加MACE风险。
作者 苏蕊雅
机构地区 南阳医学高等专科学校第一附属医院
出处 《中西医结合心脑血管病杂志》 2019年第24期4090-4093,共4页 Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine on Cardio-Cerebrovascular Disease
关键词 ST段抬高型心肌梗死 肝素 替罗非班 比伐卢定 经皮冠状动脉介入术
分类号 R542.2 [医药卫生—心血管疾病] R256.2 [医药卫生—中医内科学]
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献22

  • 1Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery ( EACTS ), European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), Wijns W, et al. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J,2010 , 31:2501-2555.
  • 2Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/ SCAI guideline for percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines and the society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions. Circulation, 2011, 124 :e574-651.
  • 3Hillis LD, Smith PK, Anderson JL, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA guideline for coronary artery bypass graft surgery. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines, developed in collaboration with the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coil Cardiol, 2011,58 :e123-210.
  • 4Nashef SA, Roques F, Michel P, et al. European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation ( EuroSCORE ). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 1999,16:9-13.
  • 5Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med, 2009,360:961- 972.
  • 6Peterson ED, Dai D, DeLong ER, et al. Contemporary mortality risk prediction for percutaneous coronary intervention: results from 588,398 procedures in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. J Am Coil Cardiol,2010,55:1923-1932.
  • 7Online STS fish calculator [ S/OL]. [ 2012-01-01 ]. http:// riskcalc, sts. org/STSWebRiskCalc273/de, aspx.
  • 8Mehta SR, Tanguay JF, Eikelboom JW, et al. Double-dose versus standard-dose clopidogrel and high-dose versus low-dose aspirin in individuals undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndromes ( CURRENT-OASIS 7 ): a randomised factorial trial. Lancet,2010,376 : 1233-1243.
  • 9Mehta SR, Granger CB, Eikelboom JW, et al. Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux versus enoxaparin in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the OASIS-5 trial. J Am Cell Cardiol,2007,50 : 1742-1751.
  • 10Mehran R, Rao SV, Bhatt DL, et al. Standardized bleeding definitions for cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium. Circulation, 2011,123:2736-2747.

共引文献432

同被引文献92

引证文献7

二级引证文献16

中西医结合心脑血管病杂志
2019年 第24期

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部