Suppr超能文献

阿哌沙班与依诺肝素用于医学疾病患者的血栓预防。

Apixaban versus enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis in medically ill patients.

机构信息

Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

出版信息

N Engl J Med. 2011 Dec 8;365(23):2167-77. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1110899. Epub 2011 Nov 13.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of prolonging prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in medically ill patients beyond hospital discharge remain uncertain. We hypothesized that extended prophylaxis with apixaban would be safe and more effective than short-term prophylaxis with enoxaparin.

METHODS

In this double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned acutely ill patients who had congestive heart failure or respiratory failure or other medical disorders and at least one additional risk factor for venous thromboembolism and who were hospitalized with an expected stay of at least 3 days to receive apixaban, administered orally at a dose of 2.5 mg twice daily for 30 days, or enoxaparin, administered subcutaneously at a dose of 40 mg once daily for 6 to 14 days. The primary efficacy outcome was the 30-day composite of death related to venous thromboembolism, pulmonary embolism, symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis, or asymptomatic proximal-leg deep-vein thrombosis, as detected with the use of systematic bilateral compression ultrasonography on day 30. The primary safety outcome was bleeding. All efficacy and safety outcomes were independently adjudicated.

RESULTS

A total of 6528 subjects underwent randomization, 4495 of whom could be evaluated for the primary efficacy outcome--2211 in the apixaban group and 2284 in the enoxaparin group. Among the patients who could be evaluated, 2.71% in the apixaban group (60 patients) and 3.06% in the enoxaparin group (70 patients) met the criteria for the primary efficacy outcome (relative risk with apixaban, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 1.23; P=0.44). By day 30, major bleeding had occurred in 0.47% of the patients in the apixaban group (15 of 3184 patients) and in 0.19% of the patients in the enoxaparin group (6 of 3217 patients) (relative risk, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.02 to 7.24; P=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

In medically ill patients, an extended course of thromboprophylaxis with apixaban was not superior to a shorter course with enoxaparin. Apixaban was associated with significantly more major bleeding events than was enoxaparin. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00457002.).

摘要

背景

延长患有内科疾病的患者静脉血栓栓塞症预防性治疗的时间,使其超过出院后时间,其疗效和安全性仍不确定。我们假设,与短期依诺肝素预防相比,延长使用阿哌沙班进行预防治疗将是安全且更有效。

方法

在这项双盲、双模拟、安慰剂对照试验中,我们将患有充血性心力衰竭或呼吸衰竭或其他内科疾病且至少存在一个静脉血栓栓塞症的其他危险因素,预计住院时间至少 3 天的急性疾病患者随机分配,接受阿哌沙班或依诺肝素治疗。阿哌沙班口服,每日 2 次,每次 2.5 毫克,连续 30 天;依诺肝素皮下注射,每日 1 次,每次 40 毫克,连续 6 天至 14 天。主要疗效终点是第 30 天使用系统双侧压迫超声检查检测到的与静脉血栓栓塞症、肺栓塞、有症状深部静脉血栓形成或无症状近端腿部深部静脉血栓形成相关的死亡、症状性深部静脉血栓形成或无症状性近端腿部深部静脉血栓形成的复合结果。主要安全性终点是出血。所有疗效和安全性结局均由独立的评审委员会评估。

结果

共有 6528 名患者接受了随机分组,其中 4495 名患者可评估主要疗效结局——阿哌沙班组 2211 名,依诺肝素组 2284 名。在可评估的患者中,阿哌沙班组有 2.71%(60 例),依诺肝素组有 3.06%(70 例)达到了主要疗效结局标准(阿哌沙班的相对风险,0.87;95%置信区间[CI],0.62 至 1.23;P=0.44)。至第 30 天,阿哌沙班组有 0.47%(3184 名患者中有 15 例),依诺肝素组有 0.19%(3217 名患者中有 6 例)发生了主要出血事件(相对风险,2.58;95%CI,1.02 至 7.24;P=0.04)。

结论

在患有内科疾病的患者中,延长阿哌沙班预防性治疗时间并不优于缩短依诺肝素预防性治疗时间。阿哌沙班的主要出血事件发生率明显高于依诺肝素。(由 Bristol-Myers Squibb 和 Pfizer 资助;ClinicalTrials.gov 编号,NCT00457002)。

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