...
首页> 外文期刊>Critical pathways in cardiology >Comparison of Clinical Outcomes: Bivalirudin With Transfemoral Access Versus Heparin With Transradial Access in Patients With ST segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction
【24h】

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes: Bivalirudin With Transfemoral Access Versus Heparin With Transradial Access in Patients With ST segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

机译:临床结果的比较:具有血液抬高患者颅内腹泻的血液迁移术治疗患者的生物研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Introduction: The best combination of access site and anticoagulant used during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients presenting with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction is not known. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all patients >18 years of age who underwent primary PCI in 2 large regional ST segment elevation myocardial infarction centers in Massachusetts between 2012 and 2014. The cohort was divided into 3 groups: bival/fem, hep/rad, or off-protocol, based on anticoagulation and access used. We used multiple logistic regression model to compare major cardiovascular events—major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and bleeding complications between the 2 on-protocol groups (bival/fem and hep/rad).Results: Of the 1074 patients in this study, there were 443 (41%), 501 (47%), and 130 (12%) patients in bival/fem, hep/rad, and off-protocol groups, respectively. There were significantly higher number of cardiogenic shock patients in the bival/fem compared to the hep/rad group (6.5% vs. 3.0%, P < 0.001). There was a trend toward reduced MACE in the hep/rad group compared to bival/fem (2.8 % vs. 5.1%, P = 0.068). When cardiogenic shock patients are excluded, there is no significant difference in mortality rates (bival/fem: 2.7% vs. hep/rad: 1.0%, P = 0.07) or bleeding complications between the groups (hep/rad: 4.5% vs. bival/fem: 2.1%, P = 0.06). Conclusions: In patients undergoing primary PCI, there was a trend toward reduced inpatient MACE with the use of heparin and radial access compared with bivalirudin with femoral access. In patients without cardiogenic shock, there is no significant difference in mortality or bleeding rates between the 2 groups.
机译:介绍:在呈现ST段抬高心肌梗死的患者中,初生经皮冠状动脉干预(PCI)中使用的接入部位和抗凝血剂的最佳组合是不名的。方法:我们对2012年和2014年间马萨诸塞州的2个大型区域ST分段抬高心肌梗死中心进行了叙述的叙述了18岁的患者> 18岁。队列分为3组:比赛/ FEM,HEP基于使用的抗凝和访问,/ RAD或OFF-CONTROC。我们使用多个Logistic回归模型将主要心血管事件 - 主要的不良心血管事件(MACE)和2个在协议组(BIVE / FEM和HEP / RAD)之间的出血并发症进行比较。结果:在这项研究中的1074名患者中,那里分别为同次/ FEM,HEP / RAD和非协议组的443(41%),501(47%)和130名(12%)患者。与HEP / RAD组相比,比赛/ FEM中的血型休克患者数量显着增加(6.5%,P <0.001)。与比例/ FEM相比,HEP / RAD组中的术语减少了术语(2.8%对5.1%,P = 0.068)。当患心源性休克患者被排除时,死亡率没有显着差异(比赛/有限元:2.7%与HEP / RAD:1.0%,P = 0.07)或组之间的出血并发症(HEP / RAD:4.5%VS.比赛/有限元:2.1%,p = 0.06)。结论:在接受初级PCI的患者中,与股骨进入的双肝素和径向进入相比,在使用肝素和径向进入的情况下,存在降低住院术。在没有心形成休克的患者中,2组之间的死亡率或出血率没有显着差异。

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