Kübler W, Darius H
Klinikum Neukölln, Vivantes-Netzwerk für Gesundheit, I. Med. Klinik, Berlin, Germany.
Z Kardiol. 2005;94 Suppl 3:III/66-73. doi: 10.1007/s00392-005-1309-8.
According to meta-analysis and the results of the two studies with the highest power, aspirin is effective in primary prevention of coronary heart disease. These beneficial effects, however, are at least partially out-weight by unwanted effects-such as intense gastrointestinal bleeding and hemorrhagic stroke. These side effects remain constant with increasing risk of coronary heart disease, whereas the protective effects increase. If an annual risk of coronary heart disease of < or =0.6% exists, aspirin is normally not indicated; for a risk of 0.7-1.4% the facts should be discussed with the patient. If a risk of > or =1.5% exists, aspirin should be given. Problems of aspirin therapy--such as "aspirin paradox" and "aspirin resistance"--have been documented for secondary prevention; they might, however, have likewise clinical implications in primary prevention.
根据荟萃分析以及两项效能最高的研究结果,阿司匹林在冠心病一级预防中有效。然而,这些有益作用至少部分被诸如严重胃肠道出血和出血性中风等不良反应所抵消。随着冠心病风险增加,这些副作用保持不变,而保护作用则增强。如果冠心病年风险≤0.6%,通常不建议使用阿司匹林;对于0.7 - 1.4%的风险,应与患者讨论相关情况。如果风险≥1.5%,则应给予阿司匹林。阿司匹林治疗的问题——如“阿司匹林悖论”和“阿司匹林抵抗”——在二级预防中已有记录;然而,它们在一级预防中可能同样具有临床意义。