...
首页> 外文期刊>The New England journal of medicine >Aspirin and extended-release dipyridamole versus clopidogrel for recurrent stroke.
【24h】

Aspirin and extended-release dipyridamole versus clopidogrel for recurrent stroke.

机译:阿司匹林和缓释双嘧达莫与氯吡格雷治疗复发性中风的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND: Recurrent stroke is a frequent, disabling event after ischemic stroke. This study compared the efficacy and safety of two antiplatelet regimens--aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole (ASA-ERDP) versus clopidogrel. METHODS: In this double-blind, 2-by-2 factorial trial, we randomly assigned patients to receive 25 mg of aspirin plus 200 mg of extended-release dipyridamole twice daily or to receive 75 mg of clopidogrel daily. The primary outcome was first recurrence of stroke. The secondary outcome was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from vascular causes. Sequential statistical testing of noninferiority (margin of 1.075), followed by superiority testing, was planned. RESULTS: A total of 20,332 patients were followed for a mean of 2.5 years. Recurrent stroke occurred in 916 patients (9.0%) receiving ASA-ERDP and in 898 patients (8.8%) receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.11). The secondary outcome occurred in 1333 patients(13.1%) in each group (hazard ratio for ASA-ERDP, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.07). There were more major hemorrhagic events among ASA-ERDP recipients (419 [4.1%]) than among clopidogrel recipients (365 [3.6%]) (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.32), including intracranial hemorrhage (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.83). The net risk of recurrent stroke or major hemorrhagic event was similar in the two groups (1194 ASA-ERDP recipients [11.7%], vs. 1156 clopidogrel recipients [11.4%]; hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.11). CONCLUSIONS: The trial did not meet the predefined criteria for noninferiority but showed similar rates of recurrent stroke with ASA-ERDP and with clopidogrel. There is no evidence that either of the two treatments was superior to the other in the prevention of recurrent stroke. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00153062.)
机译:背景:复发性中风是缺血性中风后常见的致残事件。这项研究比较了两种抗血小板方案-阿司匹林加缓释双嘧达莫(ASA-ERDP)与氯吡格雷的疗效和安全性。方法:在这项双盲,2乘2析因试验中,我们随机分配患者每天两次两次接受25 mg阿司匹林加200 mg缓释双嘧达莫或每天接受75 mg氯吡格雷。主要结果是中风的首次复发。次要结果是中风,心肌梗塞或因血管原因导致的死亡。计划对非劣效性进行顺序统计检验(利润率为1.075),然后进行优势检验。结果:总共20,332例患者接受了平均2。5年的随访。 916名接受ASA-ERDP的患者(9.0%)和氯吡格雷接受898例患者(8.8%)发生中风(危险比,1.01; 95%置信区间[CI],0.92至1.11)。每组中有1333例患者发生了次要结果(13.1%)(ASA-ERDP的危险比为0.99; 95%CI为0.92至1.07)。 ASA-ERDP接受者的主要出血事件(419 [4.1%])比氯吡格雷接受者(365 [3.6%])(危险比,1.15; 95%CI,1.00至1.32)多,包括颅内出血(危险比) ,1.42; 95%CI,1.11至1.83)。两组复发性中风或重大出血事件的净风险相似(1194名ASA-ERDP接受者[11.7%],而1156名氯吡格雷接受者[11.4%];危险比1.03; 95%CI 0.95至1.11) 。结论:该试验不符合非劣效性的预定标准,但显示ASA-ERDP和氯吡格雷的复发性卒中发生率相似。没有证据表明这两种疗法在预防复发性中风方面均优于另一种疗法。 (ClinicalTrials.gov编号,NCT00153062。)

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