Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Antithrombotic Treatment (antithrombotic + treatment)
Selected AbstractsWhich parameters differ in very old patients with chronic atrial fibrillation treated by anticoagulant or aspirin?FUNDAMENTAL & CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, Issue 5 2008Antithrombotic treatment of atrial fibrillation in the elderly Abstract The objective was to determine the main parameters taken into account for the decision of antithrombotic treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) by vitamin K antagonist or aspirin. This was a prospective clinical study of four clinical services of geriatric medicine. Two hundred and nine inpatients, 84.7 ± 7 years (women 60.8%), with chronic AF were included. The patients were distributed into two groups (anticoagulant or aspirin) according to medical decision. All the decision criteria for treatment were recorded: cardiopathy, conditions of life, clinical examination (nutrition and autonomy, mini-mental state examination (MMSE), walking evaluation, comorbidity), subjective evaluation of risk of falls and glomerular filtration rate. The thromboembolic risk and the bleeding risk, evaluated subjectively for each patient, were compared with two scores of thrombo-embolic risk and bleeding risk. The evolution of the patients was recorded after 3 months. Student's t -test and chi-squared tests were used for statistical analysis. One hundred and two patients (48.8%) received anticoagulant and 107 patients received aspirin. Patients in the aspirin group were significantly older (86.5 ± 6.5 vs. 82.9 ± 7.1 years), with more frequent social isolation, higher systolic blood pressure, and had more important subjective bleeding risk and risk of falls. Patients in the anticoagulant group had significantly more valvulopathies and a more important subjective thromboembolic risk. Thrombo-phlebitis antecedents, dementia, denutrition and walking alterations were only slightly more frequent in patients in the aspirin group. Physicians underestimated thromboembolic risk (one-third of patients) and they overestimated bleeding risk (half of the patients). After 3 months, the two groups did not significantly differ for death, bleeding or ischaemic events. In common practice, the decision of antithrombotic treatment for AF should take into account not only cardiovascular but also geriatric criteria. [source] Atrial fibrillation: insights from clinical trials and novel treatment optionsJOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, Issue 6 2007Y. Blaauw Abstract., Blaauw Y, Crijns HJGM (University Hospital Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands). Atrial fibrillation: insights from clinical trials and novel treatment options (Review). J Intern Med 2007; 262: 593,614. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common encountered sustained arrhythmia in clinical practice. The last decade the result of large ,rate' versus ,rhythm' control trials have been published that have changed the current day practise of AF treatment. It has become clear that rate control is at least equally effective as a rhythm control strategy in ameliorating morbidity as well as mortality. Moreover, in each individual patient the risk of thromboembolic events should be assessed and antithrombotic treatment be initiated. There have also been great advances in understanding the mechanisms of AF. Experimental studies showed that as a result of electrical and structural remodelling of the atria, ,AF begets AF'. Pharmacological prevention of atrial electrical remodelling has been troublesome, but it seems that blockers of the renin angiotensin system, and perhaps statins, may reduce atrial structural remodelling by preventing atrial fibrosis. Clinical studies demonstrated that the pulmonary veins exhibit foci that can act as initiator and perpetuator of the arrhythmia. Isolation of the pulmonary veins using radiofrequency catheter ablation usually abolishes AF. The most promising advances in the pharmacological treatment of AF include atrial specific antiarrhythmic drugs and direct thrombin inhibitors. In the present review we will describe the results of recent experimental studies, discuss the latest clinical trials, and we will focus on novel treatment modalities. [source] The Role of Enoxaparin in Interventional Management of Patients with Acute Coronary SyndromesJOURNAL OF INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOLOGY, Issue 5 2003CINDY L. GRINES M.D., F.A.C.C. Interventional management strategies involving early angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are increasingly widespread in the management of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Notwithstanding the benefits of early intervention, there is a significant risk of postprocedural thrombotic complications and a need to optimize antithrombotic regimens for use before and during PCI. It is clear that the current standard therapy with unfractionated heparin (UFH) and aspirin can be improved upon, in terms of both efficacy and safety. The low-molecular-weight heparin(s) (LMWHs) offer pharmacologic and practical advantages over UFH. The LMWH enoxaparin has recently emerged as the anticoagulant of choice for the acute management of ACS. Enoxaparin has also demonstrated sustained benefits over UFH in patients proceeding to PCI, and as a procedural anticoagulant. Combination therapy with enoxaparin and a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor may further improve the efficacy and safety of antithrombotic treatment during coronary interventions, as a result of the drugs' complementary mechanisms of action. Early clinical evidence supports the use of enoxaparin in combination with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in high-risk patients with ACS. Ongoing, large-scale, randomized controlled studies will help to clarify the role of enoxaparin in interventional cardiology, either as the primary anticoagulant or as part of a combination regimen, and to define optimal regimens for treatment. (J Interven Cardiol 2003;16:357,366) [source] When Should Heparin Preferably Be Administered During Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation?PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY, Issue 1 2001OLE-GUNNAR ANFINSEN ANFINSEN, O.-G., et al.: When Should Heparin Preferably be Administered During Radiofrequency Catheter Ablation? RF catheter ablation is complicated by thromboembolism in about 1% of patients. Limited knowledge exists concerning when and how to use anticoagulation or antithrombotic treatment. We studied the activation of coagulation (prothrombin fragment 1 + 2 [PF1 + 2] and D-dimer), platelets (,-thromboglobulin [,-TG]) and fibrinolysis (plasmin-antiplasmin complexes [PAP]) during RF ablation of accessory pathways in 30 patients. They were randomized to receive heparin (100 IU/kg, intravenously) (1) immediately after introduction of the femoral venous sheaths (group I) or (2) after the initial electrophysiological study, prior to the delivery of RF current (groups II and III). Group II additionally received saline irrigation of all femoral sheaths. After the initial bolus, 1,000 IU of heparin was supplied hourly in all groups. Within groups II and III, median plasma values of PF1 + 2 and ,-TG more than tripled (P , 0.007) during the diagnostic study and gradually declined during heparin administration despite RF current delivery. Median D-dimer tripled (P = 0.005) and PAP doubled (NS) before heparin administration; then both remained around the upper reference values. In the early heparin group, however, PF1 + 2, Ddimer, and PAP did not rise at all, and ,-TG showed only a slight increase towards the end of the procedure. The differences between group I versus groups II and III were statistically significant prior to the first RF current delivery (PF1 + 2, D-dimer, and ,-TG) and by the end of the procedure (PF1 + 2, D-dimer, and PAP). In conclusion, "late" heparin administration allows hemostatic activation during the initial catheterization and diagnostic study. By administering intravenous heparin immediately after introduction of the venous sheaths, hemostatic activation is significantly decreased. Saline irrigation of the venous sheaths added nothing to late heparin administration. [source] | ||||||||||