Martínez-Ríos Marco A, Rosas Martín, González Héctor, Peña-Duque Marco A, Martínez-Sánchez Carlos, Gaspar Jorge, García Héctor, Gaxiola Efraín, Delgado Luis, Carrillo Jorge, Leyva José-Luis, Lupi Eulo
National Institute of Cardiology, Mexico City, Mexico.
Am J Cardiol. 2004 Feb 1;93(3):280-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2003.10.005.
There is continued debate as to whether a combined reperfusion regimen with platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors provides additional benefit in optimal myocardial reperfusion of patients with a ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (AMI). In addition, the best angiographic method to evaluate optimal myocardial reperfusion is still controversial. Patients (n = 144) with a first AMI presenting <6 hours from onset of symptoms were randomized to receive a conjunctive strategy (n = 72) with low-dose alteplase (50 mg) and tirofiban (0.4 microg/kg/min/30 minute bolus; infusion of 0.1 microg/kg/minute), or tirofiban plus stenting percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Control patients (n = 72) received standard strategy with either full-dose alteplase (100 mg) or stenting PCI [correction]. All patients were submitted to coronary angiographic study at 90 minutes. The primary end point was Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) grade 3 flow at 90 minutes. Secondary end points were TIMI myocardial perfusion (TMP) rates, a composite end point at 30 days (death, reinfarction, refractory ischemia, stroke, heart failure, revascularization procedures, or pulmonary edema), and bleeding or hematologic variables. The rate of TIMI 3 flow at 90 minutes for patients treated with alteplase alone was 42% compared with 64% for those who received low-dose alteplase and tirofiban. Standard stenting PCI achieved 81% of TIMI 3 flow compared with 92% when tirofiban was used. Significantly higher rates of TMP grade 3 were observed when tirofiban was used as the adjunctive treatment in both alteplase (66% vs 47%) and stenting PCI (73% vs 55%). Higher rates of the composite end point were observed in standard regimens compared with conjunctive regimens (hazard ratio 5.8, 95% confidence interval 1.27 to 26.6, p = 0.023). Regardless of reperfusion regimen, better outcomes were observed when a combination of TIMI 3 flow and TMP grade 3 was achieved. Beyond TIMI 3 flow rate, the TMP grade was an important determinant. The rates of major bleeding were similar (2.8%) for standard versus conjunctive regimens with tirofiban. Thus, tirofiban as a conjunctive therapy for lytic and stenting regimens not only improves TIMI 3 flow rates, but also the TMP3 rates, which are related to a better clinical outcome without an increase in the risk of major bleeding. This study supports the hypothesis that platelets play a key role not only in the atherothrombosis process, but also in the disturbances of microcirculation and tissue perfusion.
对于血小板糖蛋白IIb/IIIa抑制剂联合再灌注方案在ST段抬高型急性心肌梗死(AMI)患者的最佳心肌再灌注中是否能带来额外益处,目前仍存在争议。此外,评估最佳心肌再灌注的最佳血管造影方法也仍有争议。症状发作后<6小时出现首次AMI的患者(n = 144)被随机分为接受联合策略组(n = 72),该组使用低剂量阿替普酶(50 mg)和替罗非班(0.4 μg/kg/min/30分钟推注;随后以0.1 μg/kg/分钟输注),或替罗非班加支架置入经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)。对照组患者(n = 72)接受标准策略,即使用全剂量阿替普酶(100 mg)或支架置入PCI [校正]。所有患者在90分钟时接受冠状动脉血管造影研究。主要终点是90分钟时心肌梗死溶栓(TIMI)3级血流。次要终点是TIMI心肌灌注(TMP)率、30天时的复合终点(死亡、再梗死、难治性缺血、中风、心力衰竭、血运重建手术或肺水肿)以及出血或血液学变量。单独使用阿替普酶治疗的患者90分钟时TIMI 3级血流率为42%,而接受低剂量阿替普酶和替罗非班的患者为64%。标准支架置入PCI实现TIMI 3级血流的比例为81%,而使用替罗非班时为92%。在阿替普酶(66%对47%)和支架置入PCI(73%对55%)中,当使用替罗非班作为辅助治疗时,观察到TMP 3级的比例显著更高。与联合方案相比,标准方案中观察到的复合终点发生率更高(风险比5.8,95%置信区间1.27至26.6,p = 0.023)。无论再灌注方案如何,当实现TIMI 3级血流和TMP 3级联合时,观察到更好的结果。除了TIMI 3级血流率外,TMP分级是一个重要的决定因素。使用替罗非班的标准方案与联合方案的严重出血发生率相似(2.8%)。因此,替罗非班作为溶栓和支架置入方案的联合治疗不仅提高了TIMI 3级血流率,还提高了TMP3率,这与更好的临床结果相关,且不会增加严重出血风险。这项研究支持了血小板不仅在动脉粥样硬化血栓形成过程中起关键作用,而且在微循环和组织灌注紊乱中也起关键作用的假说。