首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>British Heart Journal >Relevance of clinical trial results in myocardial infarction to medical practice: comparison of four year outcome in participants of a thrombolytic trial patients receiving routine thrombolysis and those deemed ineligible for thrombolysis
【2h】

Relevance of clinical trial results in myocardial infarction to medical practice: comparison of four year outcome in participants of a thrombolytic trial patients receiving routine thrombolysis and those deemed ineligible for thrombolysis

机译:心肌梗塞的临床试验结果与医学实践的相关性:溶栓试验参与者接受常规溶栓治疗的患者和认为不适合溶栓的患者四年结局的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

OBJECTIVE—To assess the medium to long term outcome of patients ineligible for thrombolysis compared to those enrolled in a clinical trial of thrombolysis and patients receiving non-trial thrombolysis.
DESIGN—Cohort study based on the Nottingham heart attack register.
SETTING—Two district general hospitals serving a defined urban/rural population.
SUBJECTS—All patients admitted with a confirmed acute myocardial infarction during 1992 categorised as either participants of a thrombolytic trial (group A, n = 140), receiving non-trial thrombolysis (group B, n = 329), or deemed ineligible for lytic treatment (group C, n = 431).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES—Background characteristics, inhospital treatment, patterns of follow up, referrals to cardiologists, revascularisation rates, and short and long term survival.
RESULTS—Clinical trial recruits were younger by almost 10 years, were less likely to have a previous history of myocardial infarction, and more likely to be in Killip class 1 on admission than those ineligible for thrombolysis. Cardiology follow up was mandatory for all surviving trial participants but 22% of patients in group B and 31% of patients in group C received no follow up, and during four years less than 50% ever saw a cardiologist. Revascularisation was performed in 17.2% of patients in group A, 13.6% of patients in group B, and 7.5% of patients in group C. Cumulative mortality at a median of four years was 24.3% in group A, 36.8% in B, and 59.6% in group C. Adjusting for age, sex, previous myocardial infarction, type of infarction, and Killip class in a logistic regression model the odds ratios (OR) of death at four years for groups B and C were 1.60 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.97 to 2.63, p = 0.065) and 2.64 (95% CI 1.61 to 4.32, p < 0.001), respectively, when compared to group A (OR 1).
CONCLUSIONS—Patients enrolled into thrombolytic trials are at low risk. Patients deemed ineligible for thrombolysis are high risk, receive less surveillance, are less likely to be revascularised or receive trial proven treatments, have a poor long term outcome not entirely explained by increased age or severity of infarction, and deserve further evaluation.


Keywords: myocardial infarction; thrombolysis; clinical trials
机译:目的-与参加溶栓临床试验的患者和接受非溶栓治疗的患者相比,评估不适合溶栓的患者的中长期结果。
DESIGN-基于诺丁汉心脏病发作登记的队列研究。< br />设置-在市区和农村地区服务的两家地区综合医院。
主题-1992年期间所有确诊为急性心肌梗死的患者被归类为溶栓试验的参与者(A组,n = 140) ,接受非试验性溶栓治疗(B组,n = 329)或被认为不适合进行溶栓治疗(C组,n = 431)。
主要观察指标—背景特征,住院治疗,随访方式,转诊给心脏病专家,血运重建率以及短期和长期生存。
结果-临床试验新兵年龄年轻了将近10年,以前有心肌梗塞病史的可能性较小,并且更多可能的入院时要达到基利普(Killip)一类的标准所有幸存的试验参与者都必须进行心脏病学随访,但是B组中22%的患者和C组中31%的患者未接受随访,并且在四年中,不到50%曾经看过心脏病专家。 A组中17.2%的患者,B组中13.6%的患者和C组中7.5%的患者进行了血运重建.4年中位数的累积死亡率在A组中为24.3%,在B中为36.8%, C组中59.6%。根据年龄,性别,先前的心肌梗塞,梗死类型和Killip类进行逻辑回归模型校正后,B组和C组四年死亡的比值比(OR)为1.60(95%置信度)与A组(OR 1)相比,区间(CI)分别为0.97到2.63,p = 0.065)和2.64(95%CI 1.61到4.32,p <0.001)。
结论—患者参加了溶栓试验处于低风险。被认为不适合进行溶栓治疗的患者具有高风险,接受较少的监视,不太可能进行血运重建或接受经过临床验证的治疗,长期预后较差,不能完全由年龄增加或梗死的严重程度完全解释,因此值得进一步评估。关键字:心肌梗塞;溶栓临床试验

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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