Suppr超能文献

动脉源性脑缺血后中等强度口服抗凝剂与阿司匹林对比研究(ESPRIT):一项随机对照试验

Medium intensity oral anticoagulants versus aspirin after cerebral ischaemia of arterial origin (ESPRIT): a randomised controlled trial.

作者信息

Halkes P H A, van Gijn J, Kappelle L J, Koudstaal P J, Algra A

出版信息

Lancet Neurol. 2007 Feb;6(2):115-24. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70685-8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Oral anticoagulants are better than aspirin for secondary prevention after myocardial infarction and after cerebral ischaemia in combination with non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation. The European/Australasian Stroke Prevention in Reversible Ischaemia Trial (ESPRIT) aimed to determine whether oral anticoagulation with medium intensity is more effective than aspirin in preventing future vascular events in patients with transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke of presumed arterial origin.

METHODS

In this international, multicentre trial, patients were randomly assigned within 6 months after a transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke of presumed arterial origin either anticoagulants (target INR range 2.0-3.0; n=536) or aspirin (30-325 mg daily; n=532). The primary outcome was the composite of death from all vascular causes, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or major bleeding complication, whichever occurred first. In a post hoc analysis anticoagulants were compared with the combination of aspirin and dipyridamole (200 mg twice daily). Treatment was open, but auditing of outcome events was blinded. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial (number ISRCTN73824458) and with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00161070).

FINDINGS

The anticoagulants versus aspirin comparison of ESPRIT was prematurely ended because ESPRIT reported previously that the combination of aspirin and dipyridamole was more effective than aspirin alone. Mean follow-up was 4.6 years (SD 2.2). The mean achieved INR was 2.57 (SD 0.86). A primary outcome event occurred in 99 (19%) patients on anticoagulants and in 98 (18%) patients on aspirin (hazard ratio [HR] 1.02, 95% CI 0.77-1.35). The HR for ischaemic events was 0.73 (0.52-1.01) and for major bleeding complications 2.56 (1.48-4.43). The HR for the primary outcome event comparing anticoagulants with the combination treatment of aspirin and dipyridamole was 1.31 (0.98-1.75).

INTERPRETATION

Oral anticoagulants (target INR range 2.0-3.0) are not more effective than aspirin for secondary prevention after transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke of arterial origin. A possible protective effect against ischaemic events is offset by increased bleeding complications.

摘要

背景

在心肌梗死后以及脑缺血合并非风湿性心房颤动的二级预防中,口服抗凝剂比阿司匹林更有效。欧洲/澳大利亚短暂性脑缺血发作预防试验(ESPRIT)旨在确定中等强度的口服抗凝治疗在预防疑似动脉源性短暂性脑缺血发作或轻度卒中患者未来血管事件方面是否比阿司匹林更有效。

方法

在这项国际多中心试验中,患者在疑似动脉源性短暂性脑缺血发作或轻度卒中后的6个月内被随机分配接受抗凝剂治疗(目标国际标准化比值[INR]范围为2.0 - 3.0;n = 536)或阿司匹林治疗(每日30 - 325毫克;n = 532)。主要结局是所有血管原因导致的死亡、非致命性卒中、非致命性心肌梗死或严重出血并发症的复合结局,以最先发生的为准。在一项事后分析中,将抗凝剂与阿司匹林和双嘧达莫(每日两次,每次200毫克)的联合用药进行了比较。治疗是开放的,但结局事件的审核是盲法进行的。主要分析采用意向性治疗。本研究已注册为国际标准随机对照试验(编号ISRCTN73824458)并在ClinicalTrials.gov上注册(NCT00161070)。

结果

ESPRIT中抗凝剂与阿司匹林的比较提前结束,因为ESPRIT此前报告阿司匹林和双嘧达莫的联合用药比单独使用阿司匹林更有效。平均随访时间为4.6年(标准差2.2)。平均达到的INR为2.57(标准差0.86)。接受抗凝剂治疗的99名(19%)患者和接受阿司匹林治疗的98名(18%)患者发生了主要结局事件(风险比[HR] 1.02,95%置信区间0.77 - 1.35)。缺血性事件的HR为0.73(0.52 - 1.01),严重出血并发症的HR为2.56(1.48 - 4.43)。抗凝剂与阿司匹林和双嘧达莫联合治疗相比主要结局事件的HR为1.31(0.98 - 1.75)。

解读

对于疑似动脉源性短暂性脑缺血发作或轻度卒中后的二级预防,口服抗凝剂(目标INR范围2.0 - 3.0)并不比阿司匹林更有效。对缺血性事件可能的保护作用被出血并发症增加所抵消。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验