期刊文献+

不同二磷酸腺苷受体拮抗剂用于冠心病的有效性、安全性和经济性研究 被引量:1

Efficacy, Safety and Economy of Different Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Antagonists in Treatment of Coronary Heart Disease
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:探讨不同二磷酸腺苷受体拮抗剂在冠心病治疗中的有效性、安全性和经济性,为临床合理选择药物提供参考。方法:回顾性收集2017—2018年苏州大学附属第一医院心血管内科收治的接受二磷酸腺苷受体拮抗剂治疗且行CYP2C19基因型和血栓弹力图检测的冠心病患者的病例资料,根据所用二磷酸腺苷受体拮抗剂的不同分为进口氯吡格雷组(A组)、国产氯吡格雷组(B组)和替格瑞洛组(C组),比较三组患者的血小板聚集抑制率、抵抗率、出血发生率和药品费用。结果:C组患者的血小板聚集抑制率明显高于A组(P=0.000)和B组(P=0.000),抵抗率明显低于A组(P=0.002)和B组(P=0.004),差异均有统计学意义。三组患者轻微出血发生率的差异无统计学意义(P=0.492)。C组患者的平均药品费用明显高于A组(P=0.033)和B组(P=0.004),日均药品费用明显高于A组(P=0.046)和B组(P=0.001),差异均有统计学意义。结论:不同二磷酸腺苷受体拮抗剂用于冠心病的安全性相似,但有效性和经济性存在差异,临床应结合患者病情和经济能力对其进行综合评估,选择合适的药物。 OBJECTIVE:To probe into the efficacy,safety and economy of different adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonists in treatment of coronary heart disease(CHD),so as to provide reference for clinical rational drug selection.METHODS:Case data of patients with CHD who received treatment of adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonists and underwent tests of CYP2C19 genotype and thromboelastography in cardiology department of the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University from 2017 to 2018 were retrospectively collected.The patients were divided into imported clopidogrel group(group A),domestic clopidogrel group(group B)and ticagrelor group(group C)according to the application of different adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonists,differences in platelet aggregation inhibition rates,platelet aggregation resistance rates,incidences of bleeding and drug expenses among three groups were compared.RESULTS:The platelet aggregation inhibition rate of group C was significantly higher than that of group A(P=0.000)and group B(P=0.000),while its resistance rate was significantly lower than that of group A(P=0.002)and group B(P=0.004),with statistically significant differences.There was no statistical significance in difference in incidences of slight bleeding among three groups(P=0.492).The average drug expense of group C was significantly higher than that of group A(P=0.033)and group B(P=0.004),the average daily drug expense of group C was significantly higher than that of group A(P=0.046)and group B(P=0.001),with statistically significant differences.CONCLUSIONS:The safety of different adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonists in treatment of CHD are similar,but there are differences in effectiveness and economy.The clinical evaluation should be based on patient s illness condition and economic ability to select appropriate drugs.
作者 谢诚 杭永付 包健安 XIE Cheng;HANG Yongfu;BAO Jian’an(Dept.of Pharmacy,the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University,Jiangsu Suzhou 215006,China)
出处 《中国医院用药评价与分析》 2019年第7期785-787,共3页 Evaluation and Analysis of Drug-use in Hospitals of China
基金 国家自然科学基金资助项目(No.81173132) 国家临床重点专科(临床药学)建设项目(卫生部部属(管)医疗机构临床学科重点项目建设专项资金)(No.国卫办医函[2018]292号)
关键词 氯吡格雷 替格瑞洛 血小板聚集抑制率 出血 药品费用 Clopidogrel Ticagrelor Platelet aggregation inhibition rate Bleeding Drug expense
  • 相关文献

参考文献13

二级参考文献204

  • 1张湧,沈无明,梁建军.国产氯吡格雷在经皮急诊冠状动脉介入治疗患者中应用的疗效观察[J].中国医学前沿杂志(电子版),2013,5(2):74-77. 被引量:5
  • 2王梅,刘克军,王德江,赵继宗,王硕,赵元立,康帅.中国脑出血疾病的直接费用负担现状及其问题[J].中国卫生经济,2005,24(7):43-46. 被引量:34
  • 3李志娟,董平栓,杨旭明,李转珍,杨喜山,王绍欣,尚喜艳,汪砚雨,朱继红,杜来景,王可,闫鹏,颛丽丽.国产和进口氯吡格雷对经皮冠状动脉介入术后血小板功能的影响[J].中国介入心脏病学杂志,2006,14(4):208-210. 被引量:24
  • 4杨新春,张大鹏,王乐丰,徐立,葛永贵,王红石,李惟铭,倪祝华,夏昆,连勇,薛永利,马利祥.冠状动脉内应用国产替罗非班对急性ST段抬高心肌梗死急诊介入治疗后心肌灌注和临床预后的影响[J].中华心血管病杂志,2007,35(6):517-522. 被引量:73
  • 5Collaborative Research Group of Reperfusion Therapy in Acute Myocardial Infarction.重组葡激酶与重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂治疗急性心肌梗死的随机多中心临床试验[J].中华心血管病杂志,2007,35(8):691-696. 被引量:43
  • 6Wallentin L, Becker RC, Budaj A, et al. Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes[ J]. N Engl J Med, 2009, 361 ( 11 ): 1045-1057. DOI: 10. 1056/ NEJMou0904327.
  • 7Harem CW,Bassand JP, Agewall S, et al. ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) [ J ]. Eur Heart J, 2011 , 32 ( 23 ) : 2999-3054. DOI : 10.1093/eurheartj/ebr236.
  • 8O'Gara PT, Kushner FG, Ascheim DD, et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infaretion: a repart of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines[ J]. J Am Coll Cardiol,2013,61 (4) :e78-e140. DOI: 10. 1016/j. jacc. 2012.11. 019.
  • 9Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F, et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) [J]. Eur Heart J,2014,35(37) :2541-2619. DOI:10. 1093/eurheartj/ehu278.
  • 10Amsterdam EA,Wenger NK, Brindis RG, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines[ J ]. Circulation, 2014,130 ( 25 ) : e344-e426. DOI : 10. 1161/CIR. 0000000000000134,.

共引文献4980

同被引文献2

引证文献1

二级引证文献16

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部