Medicina intensiva · 2009
[Enoxaparin vs. non-fractionated heparin in primary angioplasty of acute myocardial infarction].
Контролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Galeote Guillermo, Moreno Raúl, Sánchez-Recalde Angel, Jiménez-Valero Santiago, Calvo Luís, Rivero Fernando, Gallegos José F, López de Sa Estebán, Sobrino José A, López-Sendón José L
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of intravenous enoxaparin (ENX) and Non-fractionated Heparin (NFH) in primary angioplasty (PA) of acute myocardial infarction (PA-AMI).
DESIGN: A prospective, observational study.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 191 patients admitted at the hospital with the diagnosis of Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI) and treated with primary angioplasty were included. ENX was used in 91 patients (47.6%) and NFH in 100 patients (52.4%). Choice of treatment was based on the operator's opinion. Patients with cardiogenic shock were excluded. The first group received an intravenous bolus of ENX (0.75-1 mg/Kg) and the second one NFH (70-100 u/Kg), depending on whether it was associated with abciximab or not. In-hospital follow-up was performed, evaluating mortality and bleeding complications of both treatments.
RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 1.1% for the ENX group and 3.3% for NFH one. No significant differences were found in the number of bleeding complications with ENX (4.4%) and NFH (9.0%). There was one subacute thrombosis of stent for the ENX group and 3 thrombosis in the NFH-treated group. No significant differences were found in size of infarction measure with troponin I level (63.1 for ENX and 54.8 for the NFH) or in the left ventricle ejection fraction on hospital discharge (51% for ENX and 49.4% for the NFH).
CONCLUSIONS: Primary angioplasty can be safely sued with the intravenous administration of ENX, no significant differences being found between both treatments in mortality and bleeding complications.
DESIGN: A prospective, observational study.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 191 patients admitted at the hospital with the diagnosis of Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI) and treated with primary angioplasty were included. ENX was used in 91 patients (47.6%) and NFH in 100 patients (52.4%). Choice of treatment was based on the operator's opinion. Patients with cardiogenic shock were excluded. The first group received an intravenous bolus of ENX (0.75-1 mg/Kg) and the second one NFH (70-100 u/Kg), depending on whether it was associated with abciximab or not. In-hospital follow-up was performed, evaluating mortality and bleeding complications of both treatments.
RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 1.1% for the ENX group and 3.3% for NFH one. No significant differences were found in the number of bleeding complications with ENX (4.4%) and NFH (9.0%). There was one subacute thrombosis of stent for the ENX group and 3 thrombosis in the NFH-treated group. No significant differences were found in size of infarction measure with troponin I level (63.1 for ENX and 54.8 for the NFH) or in the left ventricle ejection fraction on hospital discharge (51% for ENX and 49.4% for the NFH).
CONCLUSIONS: Primary angioplasty can be safely sued with the intravenous administration of ENX, no significant differences being found between both treatments in mortality and bleeding complications.