Coronary artery disease · 2021
Routine fixed-dose heparin vs. ACT-guided heparin administration for elective PCI and its influence on patient in-hospital outcome: a retrospective study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Berkowitz Oron, Halabi Majdi, Goldberg Alexander, Rosenfeld Inna, Sharabi-Nov Adi, Regev-Avraham Zippi, Israeli Zeev
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Activated clotting time (ACT)-based heparin dosing during percutaneous intervention (PCI) is recommended by Society guidelines. However, the relationship between ACT and outcome in the setting of elective PCI has not been sufficiently studied. We sought to evaluate the in-hospital outcome of patients undergoing elective PCI while receiving fixed-dose heparin without ACT measurement versus those with ACT-guided management.
METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive patients undergoing elective PCI in a single-center between 11/2015 and 12/2018. Patients were divided into two groups, depending on whether ACT was measured. Heparin-only anticoagulation and non-femoral procedures were allowed. Patient demographics, procedural data and in-hospital outcomes were collected. The primary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), secondary (safety) outcomes were in-hospital definite stent thrombosis, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding, access-related complications (any) as well as peri-procedural complications.
RESULTS: In total, 500 procedures were included in the study, 151 ACT and 349 fixed-dose. Patient demographics and medical history in both groups were well balanced, but those having ACTs were younger (63.2 ± 10.9 vs. 66.5 ± 11.3; P = 0.003) and less likely to have a history of coronary artery disease (74 vs. 82%; P = 0.032) or kidney failure. Procedural data were similar; however, total heparin dose and procedure length were higher in the ACT group (6232 ± 1388 vs.5032 ± 417 units; P < 0.001; 40.1 ± 14.0 vs. 30.3 ± 12.7 min; P < 0.001). Primary and secondary outcome events were rare and similar (MACE 1.1 vs. 1.3%; P = 0.86).
CONCLUSIONS: A fixed-dose heparin injection (5000 IU) approach for elective PCI while omitting ACT offers slightly shortened procedural time and similar in-hospital safety profile.
METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive patients undergoing elective PCI in a single-center between 11/2015 and 12/2018. Patients were divided into two groups, depending on whether ACT was measured. Heparin-only anticoagulation and non-femoral procedures were allowed. Patient demographics, procedural data and in-hospital outcomes were collected. The primary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), secondary (safety) outcomes were in-hospital definite stent thrombosis, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding, access-related complications (any) as well as peri-procedural complications.
RESULTS: In total, 500 procedures were included in the study, 151 ACT and 349 fixed-dose. Patient demographics and medical history in both groups were well balanced, but those having ACTs were younger (63.2 ± 10.9 vs. 66.5 ± 11.3; P = 0.003) and less likely to have a history of coronary artery disease (74 vs. 82%; P = 0.032) or kidney failure. Procedural data were similar; however, total heparin dose and procedure length were higher in the ACT group (6232 ± 1388 vs.5032 ± 417 units; P < 0.001; 40.1 ± 14.0 vs. 30.3 ± 12.7 min; P < 0.001). Primary and secondary outcome events were rare and similar (MACE 1.1 vs. 1.3%; P = 0.86).
CONCLUSIONS: A fixed-dose heparin injection (5000 IU) approach for elective PCI while omitting ACT offers slightly shortened procedural time and similar in-hospital safety profile.