Suppr超能文献

接受双联抗血小板治疗的神经介入治疗患者中兰索拉唑或埃索美拉唑引发的不同氯吡格雷反应。

Different Clopidogrel Response Elicited by Lansoprazole or Esomeprazole in Patients Undergoing Neurointervention with Dual Antiplatelet Therapy.

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, 1-1-1 Zokumyoin, Chikushino, Fukuoka, 818-8502, Japan.

出版信息

Clin Drug Investig. 2019 Oct;39(10):939-944. doi: 10.1007/s40261-019-00821-5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Aspirin-clopidogrel dual antiplatelet therapy and a proton-pump inhibitor are used worldwide to prevent thromboembolism and peptic ulceration in patients undergoing neurointervention. We performed VerifyNow assays (Accumetrics, San Diego, CA, USA) to retrospectively examine the relationship between the effectiveness of antiplatelet agents and different proton-pump inhibitor types.

METHODS

Sixty-four patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysm scheduled for neurointervention received aspirin-clopidogrel dual antiplatelet therapy plus the proton-pump inhibitor lansoprazole (n = 34) or esomeprazole (n = 30). A low response to aspirin and clopidogrel was defined in terms of aspirin reaction units > 550 and P2Y12 reaction units ≥ 230, respectively, by VerifyNow assay. The characteristics, response to antiplatelet therapy, and clinical outcomes were compared in patients treated with lansoprazole or esomeprazole.

RESULTS

The preoperative mean VerifyNow aspirin reaction units and P2Y12 reaction units were 466.0 ± 67.3 and 205.0 ± 67.6, respectively. The mean aspirin reaction unit value was 482.0 ± 64.1 in the lansoprazole group, and 461.5 ± 70.9 in the esomeprazole group (p = 0.77). The mean P2Y12 reaction unit was 220.0 ± 64.4 in the lansoprazole group, and 174.5 ± 65.0 in the esomeprazole group; there was a significant difference in the clopidogrel response of patient treated with lansoprazole or esomeprazole (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Our VerifyNow assay results suggest that when on lansoprazole fewer patients achieved the therapeutic goal and required extra therapy before neurointervention.

摘要

背景

阿司匹林-氯吡格雷双联抗血小板治疗和质子泵抑制剂在全球范围内用于预防接受神经介入治疗的患者发生血栓栓塞和消化性溃疡。我们使用 VerifyNow 检测法(Accumetrics,圣地亚哥,CA,美国)回顾性分析抗血小板药物的疗效与不同质子泵抑制剂类型之间的关系。

方法

64 例未破裂颅内动脉瘤患者拟行神经介入治疗,接受阿司匹林-氯吡格雷双联抗血小板治疗+质子泵抑制剂兰索拉唑(n=34)或埃索美拉唑(n=30)。通过 VerifyNow 检测法,将阿司匹林反应单位>550 和 P2Y12 反应单位≥230 定义为阿司匹林和氯吡格雷低反应。比较兰索拉唑或埃索美拉唑治疗患者的特征、抗血小板治疗反应和临床结局。

结果

术前平均 VerifyNow 阿司匹林反应单位和 P2Y12 反应单位分别为 466.0±67.3 和 205.0±67.6。兰索拉唑组的平均阿司匹林反应单位值为 482.0±64.1,埃索美拉唑组为 461.5±70.9(p=0.77)。兰索拉唑组的平均 P2Y12 反应单位为 220.0±64.4,埃索美拉唑组为 174.5±65.0;兰索拉唑或埃索美拉唑治疗患者的氯吡格雷反应有显著差异(p=0.005)。

结论

我们的 VerifyNow 检测法结果表明,兰索拉唑治疗时,较少患者达到治疗目标,并且在神经介入治疗前需要额外的治疗。

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