CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

双重抗血小板治疗持续时间

Abstract

Recommended Article

Three vs twelve months of dual antiplatelet therapy after zotarolimus-eluting stents: the OPTIMIZE randomized trial Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes Genotyping to Guide Clopidogrel Treatment: An In-Depth Analysis of the TAILOR-PCI Trial P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy with Clopidogrel Versus Ticagrelor in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Open-label Trial to Compare Efficacy and Safety of Clopidogrel vs. Ticagrelor in Stabilized Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction after Percutan eous Coronary Intervention: rationale and design of the TALOS-AMI trial Osteoarthritis risk is reduced after treatment with ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel: a propensity score matching analysis 1-Year Outcomes of Delayed Versus Immediate Intervention in Patients With Transient ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration in Medically Managed Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: Sub-Analysis of the OPT-CAD Study

Original Research2008 Aug;4(2):181-3.

JOURNAL:EuroIntervention. Article Link

Management of two major complications in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory: the no-reflow phenomenon and coronary perforations

Muller O, Windecker S, Cuisset T et al. Keywords: complication; no-reflow phenomenon; coronary perforation

ABSTRACT


The no-reflow phenomenon has been defined in 2001 by Eeckhout and Kern as inadequate myocardial perfusion through a given segment of the coronary circulation without angiographic evidence of mechanical vessel obstruction1. Rates of cardiac death and non-fatal cardiac events are increased in patients with compared to those without no-reflow2,3. The term “no reflow” encompasses the slow-flow, slow-reflow, no-flow and low-flow phenomenon. Its incidence depends on the clinical setting, ranging from as low as 2% in elective native coronary percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) to 20% in saphenous venous graft (SVG) PCI and up to 26% in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) mechanical reperfusion4-6. Depending on the clinical setting, the mechanism of the no-reflow phenomenon differs. Distal embolisation and ischaemic-reperfusion cell injury prevail in patients with AMI, microvascular spasm and embolisation of aggregated platelets occur in native coronary PCI, whereas embolisation of degenerated plaque elements, including thrombotic and atherosclerotic debris are encountered during SVG PCI7. The no-reflow phenomenon is classified according to its pathophysiology with potential implications for its treatment in the categories provided in Table 1.