...
首页> 外文期刊>Circulation journal >Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Ticagrelor and Prasugrel in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction ― Results From the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institutes of Health ―
【24h】

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Ticagrelor and Prasugrel in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction ― Results From the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institutes of Health ―

机译:ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者替卡格雷洛和普拉格雷的临床疗效比较-韩国急性心肌梗死注册机构-国立卫生研究院的结果-

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: There is little information regarding comparison of ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We sought to compare clinical outcomes between ticagrelor and prasugrel in STEMI. Methods?and?Results: A total of 1,440 patients with STEMI who underwent successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention were analyzed; the data were obtained from the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institutes of Health. Of the patients, 963 received ticagrelor, and 477 received prasugrel. The primary study endpoint was 12-month major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR). MACE occurred in 91 patients (6.3%) over the 1-year follow-up, and there were no differences in the incidence of MACE (hazard ratio [HR] 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76–1.91, P=0.438) between the 2 groups. Analysis by propensity score matching (429 pairs) did not significantly affect the results. The incidence of in-hospital major bleeding events was still comparable between the 2 groups (2.4% vs. 2.5%, odds ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.30–1.86, P=0.532), and there was no significant difference in the incidence of MACE (5.4% vs. 5.8%, HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.56–1.74, P=0.951) after matching. Conclusions: Ticagrelor and prasugrel showed similar efficacy and safety profiles for treating STEMI in this Korean multicenter registry.
机译:背景:关于ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者中替卡格雷和普拉格雷的比较资料很少。我们试图比较替卡格雷和普拉格雷在STEMI中的临床结局。方法和结果:共分析了1,440例行成功的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的STEMI患者。数据来自韩国急性心肌梗塞注册处-国立卫生研究院。在这些患者中,有963位接受替卡格雷治疗,而477位接受普拉格雷治疗。主要研究终点为12个月的主要不良心脏事件(MACE),包括心脏死亡,心肌梗塞(MI)和目标血管血运重建(TVR)。在1年的随访中,有91例患者发生了MACE(6.3%),并且MACE的发生率没有差异(危险比[HR] 1.20,95%置信区间[CI] 0.76-1.91,P = 0.438) )在两组之间。通过倾向得分匹配(429对)进行的分析没有显着影响结果。两组的院内重大出血事件的发生率仍相当(2.4%vs. 2.5%,优势比为0.75,95%CI为0.30–1.86,P = 0.532),且两组之间的发生率无显着差异。匹配后的MACE(5.4%vs.5.8%,HR 0.98,95%CI 0.56-1.74,P = 0.951)。结论:在该韩国多中心注册中心中,替卡格雷和普拉格雷显示出相似的疗效和安全性,可用于治疗STEMI。

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