首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Neurology >Comparison of Clopidogrel and Ticlopidine/ Ginkgo Biloba in Patients With Clopidogrel Resistance and Carotid Stenting
【24h】

Comparison of Clopidogrel and Ticlopidine/ Ginkgo Biloba in Patients With Clopidogrel Resistance and Carotid Stenting

机译:氯吡格雷抵抗和颈动脉支架置入术中氯吡格雷和噻氯匹定/ 银杏的比较

获取原文
           

摘要

Background and Purpose: Patients undergoing carotid artery stenting (CAS) who show low responsiveness to clopidogrel may have a higher risk of peri-procedural embolic events. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of clopidogrel and ticlopidine plus Ginkgo biloba in clopidogrel-resistant patients undergoing CAS. Methods: In this multi-center, randomized, controlled trial, we used platelet reactivity test to select patients undergoing CAS who showed clopidogrel resistance, and compared treatments using clopidogrel and ticlopidine plus ginkgo. The primary outcome was the incidence of new ischemic lesion in the ipsilateral hemisphere of CAS. Detection of microembolic signal on transcranial Doppler was the secondary outcome. The clinical outcomes were also monitored. Results: This trial was discontinued after 42 patients were randomized after preplanned interim sample size re-estimation indicated an impractical sample size. The primary endpoint occurred in 12/22 patients (54.5%) in the clopidogrel group and 13/20 patients (65.0%) in the ticlopidine–ginkgo group ( P = 0.610). No significant differences in the presence of microembolic signal (15.0 vs. 11.8%, P = 0.580), clinical outcomes (ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, 0.0 vs. 5.5%; acute myocardial infarction 0.0 vs. 0.0%; all-cause death, 4.5 vs. 0.0%), or incidence of adverse events were found in the two groups. In terms of resistance to clopidogrel, treatment with ticlopidine–ginkgo significantly increased the P2Y12 Reaction Units (difference, 0.0 [?0.3–3.0] vs. 21.0 [6.0–35.0], P & 0.001). Conclusions: In patients who showed clopidogrel resistance, ticlopidine–ginkgo treatment was safe and increased P2Y12 Reaction Units; however, compared to clopidogrel, it failed to improve surrogate and clinical endpoints in patients undergoing CAS. This multimodal biomarker-based clinical trial is feasible in neurointerventional research. Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02133989.
机译:背景与目的:接受颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)的患者对氯吡格雷的反应性低,其围手术期栓塞事件的风险可能更高。本研究旨在比较氯吡格雷和噻氯匹定联合银杏叶在接受CAS的氯吡格雷抵抗性患者中的有效性和安全性。方法:在这项多中心,随机,对照试验中,我们使用血小板反应性试验选择了表现出氯吡格雷抵抗的CAS患者,并比较了氯吡格雷和噻氯匹定加银杏的治疗。主要结局是CAS同侧半球新发缺血性病变的发生率。次要的结果是经颅多普勒检测微栓塞信号。还监测了临床结果。结果:42名患者在预先计划的临时样本量重新估计表明样本量不切实际后被随机分组​​,因此该试验中止。主要终点发生在氯吡格雷组的12/22患者(54.5%)和噻氯匹定-银杏组的13/20患者(65.0%)中(P = 0.610)。微栓塞信号的存在(15.0 vs. 11.8%,P = 0.580),临床结局(缺血性中风或短暂性脑缺血发作,0.0 vs. 5.5%;急性心肌梗塞0.0 vs. 0.0%;全因死亡)无显着差异(分别为4.5%和0.0%),或者在两组中发现不良事件的发生率。就氯吡格雷的抗性而言,噻氯匹定-银杏治疗显着提高了P2Y12反应单位(差异为0.0 [?0.3-3.0] vs. 21.0 [6.0-35.0],P <0.001)。结论:对氯吡格雷耐药的患者,噻氯匹定-银杏治疗是安全的,并增加了P2Y12反应单位。但是,与氯吡格雷相比,它不能改善接受CAS的患者的替代指标和临床终点。这项基于多峰生物标志物的临床试验在神经介入研究中是可行的。临床试验注册:http://www.clinicaltrials.gov。唯一标识符:NCT02133989。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号