Pharmacy Department, CHU Sainte-Justine, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
ASAIO J. 2010 Jan-Feb;56(1):42-7. doi: 10.1097/MAT.0b013e3181c84e61.
Tinzaparin offers some advantages over unfractionated heparin (UFH) for hemodialysis circuit anticoagulation. No study has compared these two molecules as hemodialysis catheter locks. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of tinzaparin and UFH as locks for hemodialysis tunnelled central venous catheter in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). A randomized, prospective, single-blinded, controlled study was undertaken. Patients were randomly assigned to receive UFH and tinzaparin for two 7-week periods in a crossover fashion. The doses used were 5,000 U of UFH and 2,000 U of tinzaparin per catheter line. The primary outcome was the need for thrombolytic catheter lock use defined with the Hemodialysis Unit alteplase protocol. Forty-two patients with ESRD were enrolled, totalling 815 UFH lock sessions and 729 tinzaparin lock sessions. A 47.4% reduction in the incidence of alteplase lock use was observed with tinzaparin lock (3.16% vs. 6.01%, chi-square, p = 0.0078). There was no significant difference in the time to first alteplase use between the two locks by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (logrank, p = 0.0900). Our results suggest that tinzaparin could be an appropriate alternative for a hemodialysis tunnelled central venous catheter lock, but these results should be confirmed with a larger trial.
亭扎肝素在血液透析回路抗凝方面相对于普通肝素(UFH)具有一些优势。目前还没有研究比较这两种分子作为血液透析导管锁的效果。本研究旨在比较亭扎肝素和 UFH 作为终末期肾病(ESRD)患者血液透析隧道式中心静脉导管锁的疗效。这是一项随机、前瞻性、单盲、对照研究。患者以交叉方式随机分配接受 UFH 和亭扎肝素治疗两个 7 周疗程。使用的剂量分别为每条导管线 5000 U UFH 和 2000 U 亭扎肝素。主要结局是根据血液透析单位阿替普酶方案定义的溶栓导管锁使用需求。共纳入 42 例 ESRD 患者,共进行了 815 次 UFH 锁治疗和 729 次亭扎肝素锁治疗。与 UFH 锁相比,亭扎肝素锁可使阿替普酶锁使用的发生率降低 47.4%(3.16% vs. 6.01%,卡方检验,p = 0.0078)。通过 Kaplan-Meier 生存分析(对数秩检验,p = 0.0900),两种锁之间首次使用阿替普酶的时间无显著差异。我们的研究结果表明,亭扎肝素可能是血液透析隧道式中心静脉导管锁的一种合适替代药物,但这些结果需要更大规模的试验来证实。