Suppr超能文献

冠状动脉内推注给药与静脉推注联合替罗非班输注在接受直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者中的应用比较。

Intracoronary bolus-only compared with intravenous bolus plus infusion of tirofiban application in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Kartal Kosuyolu Heart Education and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

出版信息

Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012 Jan 1;79(1):59-67. doi: 10.1002/ccd.23109. Epub 2011 Nov 30.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this pilot study was to compare intracoronary bolus-only with standard intravenous bolus plus maintenance infusion of tirofiban with respect to improvement in myocardial reperfusion after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (p-PCI).

BACKGROUND

Changes in clinical practice may obviate the need for a maintenance infusion of small molecule glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in current practice.

METHODS

Forty-nine patients undergoing p-PCI were randomized to either intracoronary bolus-only (n = 25) or intravenous bolus plus infusion (n = 24) of tirofiban. The primary end point was coronary hemodynamic indices of microvascular perfusion measured 4-5 days after p-PCI. The secondary end points were ST segment resolution at 90 min, the corrected TIMI frame count and myocardial blush grade. At 6 months, echocardiography and technetium-99m single-photon-emission computed tomography were performed.

RESULTS

Microvascular perfusion did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups: index of microvascular resistance (27 ± 13 vs. 35 ± 15 U, P = 0.08) and coronary flow reserve (2.2 ± 0.7 vs. 1.9 ± 0.6, P = 0.25). The corrected TIMI frame counts assessed in the first (P = 0.13) and the second (P = 0.09) catheterization or the myocardial blush grades evaluated immediately (P = 0.23) and 4-5 days after MI (P = 1.00) were not significantly different between the two groups. At 6 months, there was no difference between the two groups in infarct size, left ventricular volumes, or ejection fraction.

CONCLUSIONS

The standard intravenous bolus plus maintenance infusion of tirofiban in p-PCI is not superior to intracoronary bolus-only administration with respect to microvascular perfusion. Further, adequately powered randomized trials are warranted to evaluate the clinical outcomes associated with this strategy.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(p-PCI)中单纯冠状动脉内推注与标准静脉推注加维持输注替罗非班对心肌再灌注的改善作用。

背景

临床实践的变化可能使小分子糖蛋白 IIb/IIIa 抑制剂的维持输注在当前实践中变得不必要。

方法

49 例行 p-PCI 的患者被随机分为单纯冠状动脉内推注组(n = 25)或静脉推注加输注组(n = 24)。主要终点是 p-PCI 后 4-5 天测量的微血管灌注的冠状动脉血流动力学指标。次要终点是 90 分钟时 ST 段缓解、校正的 TIMI 帧数和心肌灌注分级。6 个月时进行超声心动图和锝-99m 单光子发射计算机断层扫描。

结果

两组间微血管灌注无显著差异:微血管阻力指数(27 ± 13 比 35 ± 15 U,P = 0.08)和冠状动脉血流储备(2.2 ± 0.7 比 1.9 ± 0.6,P = 0.25)。第一次(P = 0.13)和第二次(P = 0.09)导管插入术或即刻(P = 0.23)和心肌梗死 4-5 天后(P = 1.00)评估的校正 TIMI 帧数无显著差异。6 个月时,两组间梗死面积、左心室容积或射血分数无差异。

结论

与单纯冠状动脉内推注相比,p-PCI 中标准静脉推注加维持输注替罗非班并不能改善微血管灌注。需要进一步进行充分的随机试验来评估该策略与临床结局的相关性。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验