Stephens N G, Ludman P F, Petch M C, Schofield P M, Shapiro L M
Cardiac Unit, Papworth Hospital, Cambridge.
Heart. 1996 Sep;76(3):238-42. doi: 10.1136/hrt.76.3.238.
To investigate whether an elective change in the anticoagulation protocol for patients with coronary stents affected clinical outcomes and length of hospital stay.
Retrospective observational study of a consecutive series of patients treated with coronary stents over an 18 month period from April 1994 to October 1995.
Intensive anticoagulation regimens are used in many UK centres to reduce the risk of coronary stent thrombosis. Recent data have called into question the necessity for full anticoagulation and favourable results have been reported with antiplatelet agents alone. The results from a tertiary referral centre were investigated during a period where an elective change in policy was made: an initial 70 patients were treated intensively with intravenous heparin and with warfarin and aspirin; subsequently 94 were treated with aspirin and deployment of a high pressure balloon only.
Review of case notes, angiograms, and a database of intervention procedures and telephone interview. Classic epidemiological techniques, as well as linear regression and logistic regression, were used to model the outcomes of major procedural complications and length of hospital stay.
164 patients treated with 196 coronary stents.
There were 22 (13.4%) major complications (coronary bypass grafting 11, subacute thrombosis 6, tamponade 2, myocardial infarction 1, death 2). With logistic regression, the risk of major complication was shown not to be affected by anticoagulation (relative risk (RR) 1.03; P = 0.97). Significant determinants of risk included acute vessel closure as an indication for stenting (RR = 80.6; P < 0.001) and sex (male: female RR = 0.19; P = 0.02). The median length of stay (LOS) was 5 days (1-45). Use of a linear regression model showed that anticoagulation added 4.5 days and a major complication added a further 4.5 days to a baseline length of stay of 3.2 days (R2 = 0.32; P < 0.001).
This is a report of coronary stenting as part of usual clinical practice in one British tertiary referral centre. In this experience, treatment with aspirin alone is probably as safe as intensive anticoagulation, and has the benefit of reducing length of stay by more than 50% to 3.2 days in an uncomplicated case.
调查冠状动脉支架置入患者抗凝方案的选择性改变是否会影响临床结局及住院时间。
对1994年4月至1995年10月这18个月期间连续接受冠状动脉支架置入治疗的一系列患者进行回顾性观察研究。
英国许多中心采用强化抗凝方案以降低冠状动脉支架血栓形成的风险。近期数据对充分抗凝的必要性提出了质疑,且有报道称单独使用抗血小板药物也取得了良好效果。在一个三级转诊中心政策发生选择性改变的期间进行了研究:最初70例患者接受静脉肝素、华法林和阿司匹林的强化治疗;随后94例患者仅接受阿司匹林治疗并使用高压球囊。
查阅病例记录、血管造影以及干预操作数据库,并进行电话访谈。采用经典流行病学技术以及线性回归和逻辑回归对主要手术并发症的结局和住院时间进行建模。
164例接受196个冠状动脉支架置入治疗的患者。
发生22例(13.4%)主要并发症(冠状动脉搭桥术11例、亚急性血栓形成6例、心包填塞2例、心肌梗死1例、死亡2例)。通过逻辑回归分析显示,主要并发症的风险不受抗凝影响(相对风险(RR)1.03;P = 0.97)。风险的显著决定因素包括作为支架置入指征的急性血管闭塞(RR = 80.6;P < 0.001)和性别(男性:女性RR = 0.19;P = 0.02)。中位住院时间(LOS)为5天(1 - 45天)。使用线性回归模型显示,抗凝使住院时间在基线住院时间3.2天的基础上增加4.5天,主要并发症又使住院时间进一步增加4.5天(R2 = 0.32;P < 0.001)。
这是一份关于英国一家三级转诊中心常规临床实践中冠状动脉支架置入情况的报告。在此经验中,单独使用阿司匹林治疗可能与强化抗凝一样安全,且在无并发症的情况下,有将住院时间减少超过50%至3.2天的益处。