Suppr超能文献

症状性颅内动脉粥样硬化狭窄患者联合抗血小板治疗的疗效和安全性。

Efficacy and safety of combination antiplatelet therapies in patients with symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis.

机构信息

Asan Medical Center, Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Ulsan, Ulsan, Korea.

出版信息

Stroke. 2011 Oct;42(10):2883-90. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.609370. Epub 2011 Jul 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

An optimal strategy for management of symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) has not yet been established. We compared the efficacy of 2 combinations of antiplatelets, aspirin plus cilostazol (cilostazol group) verus aspirin plus clopidogrel (clopidogrel group), on the progression of ICAS, which is known to be associated with clinical stroke recurrence.

METHODS

In this investigator-initiated double-blind trial, 457 patients with acute symptomatic stenosis in the M1 segment of the middle cerebral artery or the basilar artery were randomly allocated into either a cilostazol group or a clopidogrel group. After 7 months of treatment, follow-up MR angiogram and MRI were performed. The primary end point was the progression of ICAS in comparison with stenosis on the baseline MR angiogram. Secondary end points included the occurrence of new ischemic lesions on MRI, composite of cardiovascular events, and major bleeding complications.

RESULTS

Cardiovascular events occurred in 15 of 232 patients (6.4%) in the cilostazol group and 10 of 225 (4.4%) in the clopidogrel group (P=0.312). Cilostazol did not reduce the progression of symptomatic ICAS (20 of 202) compared to clopidogrel (32 of 207) (odds ratio, 0.61; P=0.092), although favorable changes in serum lipoproteins were observed in the cilostazol group. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with respect to new ischemic lesions (18.7% versus 12.0%; P=0.078) and major hemorrhagic complications (0.9% versus 2.6%; P=0.163).

CONCLUSIONS

This trial failed to show significant difference in preventing progression of ICAS and new ischemic lesions between the 2 combination antiplatelet therapies in the patients with symptomatic ICAS.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00130039.

摘要

背景与目的

目前,对于症状性颅内动脉粥样硬化性狭窄(ICAS)的最佳治疗策略尚未确定。本研究比较了双联抗血小板治疗方案(阿司匹林联合西洛他唑组与阿司匹林联合氯吡格雷组)对 ICAS 进展的疗效,已知 ICAS 进展与临床卒中复发相关。

方法

本研究为研究者发起的、双盲临床试验,共纳入 457 例急性症状性大脑中动脉 M1 段或基底动脉狭窄患者,随机分配至西洛他唑组或氯吡格雷组。治疗 7 个月后,行磁共振血管造影和磁共振检查。主要终点为与基线磁共振血管造影比较 ICAS 的进展。次要终点包括磁共振上新发缺血性病灶、心血管事件复合终点及主要出血并发症的发生。

结果

西洛他唑组 232 例患者中有 15 例(6.4%)发生心血管事件,氯吡格雷组 225 例患者中有 10 例(4.4%)发生心血管事件(P=0.312)。与氯吡格雷组相比,西洛他唑组症状性 ICAS 进展患者比例(20/202 例)更低(20/207 例)(比值比,0.61;P=0.092),但西洛他唑组患者的血清脂蛋白水平有更明显的改善。两组间新发缺血性病灶(18.7%比 12.0%;P=0.078)和主要出血并发症(0.9%比 2.6%;P=0.163)发生率无显著差异。

结论

本研究未发现双联抗血小板治疗方案对症状性 ICAS 患者的 ICAS 进展和新发缺血性病灶有显著差异。

临床试验注册

网址:http://www.clinicaltrials.gov。唯一识别码:NCT00130039。

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