节点文献

低剂量替罗非班治疗急性缺血性卒中的有效性和安全性研究

Efficacy and safety of low-dose tirofiban in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke

  • 推荐 CAJ下载
  • PDF下载
  • 不支持迅雷等下载工具,请取消加速工具后下载。

【作者】 许丹华; 史长城; 王刚; 刘克勤; 倪祝美; 桑红菲; 周永吉; 殷聪国;

【Author】 XU Danhua;SHI Changcheng;WANG Gang;LIU Keqin;NI Zhumei;SANG Hongfei;ZHOU Yongji;YIN Congguo;Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Affiliated Hangzhou First People’s Hospital, Xihu University School of Medicine;Key Laboratory of Clinical Cancer Pharmacology and Toxicology Research of Zhejiang Province, Affiliated Hangzhou First People’s Hospital, Xihu University School of Medicine;Neurology Department, Affiliated Hangzhou First People’s Hospital, Xihu University School of Medicine;Emergency Department, Affiliated Hangzhou First People’s Hospital, Xihu University School of Medicine;

【通讯作者】 殷聪国;

【机构】 西湖大学医学院附属杭州市第一人民医院临床药学科; 西湖大学医学院附属杭州市第一人民医院浙江省临床肿瘤药理与毒理学研究重点实验室; 西湖大学医学院附属杭州市第一人民医院神经内科; 西湖大学医学院附属杭州市第一人民医院急诊科;

【摘要】 目的 评估低剂量替罗非班治疗急性缺血性卒中(AIS)的有效性和安全性。方法 收集2019年1月至2023年12月收治的使用低剂量替罗非班进行抗血小板治疗的AIS病例236例作为替罗非班组,选取同期收治的口服抗血小板药物进行抗血小板治疗的AIS病例105例作为对照组,采用倾向性评分匹配(PSM)法进行匹配后,比较2组治疗的有效性和安全性。结果 采用PSM后,2组各匹配到86例病例。有效性方面,替罗非班组治疗3个月后改良Rankin量表(mRS)评分为0~1的病例占比高于对照组(P<0.05)。治疗3个月后2组mRS评分为0~2和> 2的病例占比比较,差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。2组治疗后72 h的美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)评分比较差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。安全性方面,2组各类型颅内出血发生率和治疗3个月内的全因死亡率比较差异均无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。2组血小板减少、消化系统或泌尿系统隐血试验阳性和血红蛋白水平<100 g·L~-1的颅外出血的发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。结论 与口服抗血小板药物相比,替罗非班对AIS患者长期神经功能的改善具有一定的优势,并且不增加出血风险,安全性良好。

【Abstract】 AIM To evaluate the efficacy and safety of low-dose tirofiban injection in treating acute ischemicstroke(AIS). METHODS From January 2019 to December 2023, a total of 236 AIS patients treated with early antiplatelettherapy using low-dose tirofiban were collected as the tirofiban group. Additionally, 105 AIS patients treated with oralantiplatelet medications for antiplatelet therapy during the same period were selected as the control group. After propensityscore matching(PSM), the effectiveness and safety between the 2 groups were compared. RESULTS Following PSM,86 patients were matched in each of 2 groups. Regarding effectiveness, the proportion of patients with a modified RankinScale(mRS) score of 0-1 after 3 months of treatment in the tirofiban group was higher than that in the control group(P <0.05). However, there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in the distribution of mRS scores(0-2vs >2) after 3 months of treatment(P > 0.05). There was also no statistically significant difference in National Institutes ofHealth Stroke Scale(NIHSS) scores between the 2 groups at 72 hours after treatment(P > 0.05). Regarding safety, therewere no statistically significant differences between 2 groups in the incidence of various types of intracranial hemorrhageand all-cause mortality within 3 months of treatment(P > 0.05). Additionally, there were no statistically significantdifferences between the 2 groups in the incidence of thrombocytopenia, positive occult blood tests in the digestive orurinary tract, and extracranial hemorrhage with hemoglobin levels below 100 g·L~-1(P > 0.05). CONCLUSION Comparedto oral antiplatelet medications, tirofiban demonstrates certain advantages in improving long-term neurological function inpatients with AIS, without increasing the risk of bleeding and exhibiting good safety.

【关键词】 急性缺血性卒中; 替罗非班; 有效性; 安全性;
【Key words】 acute ischemic stroke; tirofiban; efficacy; safety;
【基金】 浙江省医药卫生科技计划项目(编号2021KY878);浙江省医药卫生科技计划项目(编号2022KY937);浙江省杭州市省市共建医学重点学科(编号:浙卫办[2018]2号)
  • 【文献出处】 中国临床药学杂志 ,Chinese Journal of Clinical Pharmacy , 编辑部邮箱 ,2025年03期
  • 【分类号】R743.3
  • 【下载频次】29
节点文献中: 

本文链接的文献网络图示:

本文的引文网络