Guiping Wang, Kaijie Qi, Xuyang Li, Shuping Zuo, Ruolin Zhang, Yanan Zhao, Suya Sun, Juanjuan Zhang, Xiaokun Liu
{"title":"肝素和比伐鲁定在经皮冠状动脉介入治疗急性冠状动脉综合征中的应用综述。","authors":"Guiping Wang, Kaijie Qi, Xuyang Li, Shuping Zuo, Ruolin Zhang, Yanan Zhao, Suya Sun, Juanjuan Zhang, Xiaokun Liu","doi":"10.1155/cdr/5549914","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is one of the most common leading global causes of mortality, encompassing ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and unstable angina (UA). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has become a pivotal therapeutic approach for ACS, underscoring the importance of anticoagulation strategies. Among the commonly employed anticoagulants in PCI, heparin and bivalirudin take precedence, with heparin serving as the archetypal choice. Nevertheless, the determination of an optimal anticoagulation regimen remains a point of contention in contemporary clinical practice. To address the differences in anticoagulants during PCI, we meticulously conducted a literature review through PubMed and Web of Science, employing search terms such as \"heparin,\" \"bivalirudin,\" \"percutaneous coronary intervention,\" and \"acute coronary syndrome.\" For patients with PIC brought on by STEMI, NSTEMI, and stable or UA pectoris, the review focused on randomized controlled trials to assess and compare the efficacy and safety of heparin and bivalirudin as anticoagulant options. This systematic review is aimed at furnishing valuable insights into the ongoing debate surrounding the choice of anticoagulation regimens in PCI. By scrutinizing clinical evidence derived from relevant trials, we seek to inform and guide healthcare practitioners in making informed decisions based on the unique requirements of patients with various ACS presentations.</p>","PeriodicalId":9582,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Therapeutics","volume":"2024 ","pages":"5549914"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11695083/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Heparin and Bivalirudin in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Review Article.\",\"authors\":\"Guiping Wang, Kaijie Qi, Xuyang Li, Shuping Zuo, Ruolin Zhang, Yanan Zhao, Suya Sun, Juanjuan Zhang, Xiaokun Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/cdr/5549914\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is one of the most common leading global causes of mortality, encompassing ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and unstable angina (UA). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has become a pivotal therapeutic approach for ACS, underscoring the importance of anticoagulation strategies. Among the commonly employed anticoagulants in PCI, heparin and bivalirudin take precedence, with heparin serving as the archetypal choice. Nevertheless, the determination of an optimal anticoagulation regimen remains a point of contention in contemporary clinical practice. To address the differences in anticoagulants during PCI, we meticulously conducted a literature review through PubMed and Web of Science, employing search terms such as \\\"heparin,\\\" \\\"bivalirudin,\\\" \\\"percutaneous coronary intervention,\\\" and \\\"acute coronary syndrome.\\\" For patients with PIC brought on by STEMI, NSTEMI, and stable or UA pectoris, the review focused on randomized controlled trials to assess and compare the efficacy and safety of heparin and bivalirudin as anticoagulant options. This systematic review is aimed at furnishing valuable insights into the ongoing debate surrounding the choice of anticoagulation regimens in PCI. By scrutinizing clinical evidence derived from relevant trials, we seek to inform and guide healthcare practitioners in making informed decisions based on the unique requirements of patients with various ACS presentations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9582,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cardiovascular Therapeutics\",\"volume\":\"2024 \",\"pages\":\"5549914\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11695083/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cardiovascular Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/cdr/5549914\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/cdr/5549914","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
急性冠脉综合征(ACS)是全球最常见的主要死亡原因之一,包括st段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)、非st段抬高型心肌梗死(NSTEMI)和不稳定型心绞痛(UA)。经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)已成为ACS的关键治疗方法,强调抗凝策略的重要性。在PCI常用的抗凝剂中,肝素和比伐鲁定优先,肝素是首选。然而,在当代临床实践中,最佳抗凝治疗方案的确定仍然是一个争论点。为了解决PCI期间抗凝剂的差异,我们通过PubMed和Web of Science仔细地进行了文献综述,使用搜索词,如“肝素”、“比伐鲁定”、“经皮冠状动脉介入治疗”和“急性冠状动脉综合征”。对于STEMI、NSTEMI和稳定型或UA型心肌梗死引起的PIC患者,本综述侧重于随机对照试验,以评估和比较肝素和比伐鲁定作为抗凝剂的有效性和安全性。本系统综述旨在为围绕PCI中抗凝治疗方案选择的持续争论提供有价值的见解。通过仔细审查来自相关试验的临床证据,我们试图告知和指导医疗从业人员根据不同ACS患者的独特需求做出明智的决定。
Heparin and Bivalirudin in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Review Article.
Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is one of the most common leading global causes of mortality, encompassing ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and unstable angina (UA). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has become a pivotal therapeutic approach for ACS, underscoring the importance of anticoagulation strategies. Among the commonly employed anticoagulants in PCI, heparin and bivalirudin take precedence, with heparin serving as the archetypal choice. Nevertheless, the determination of an optimal anticoagulation regimen remains a point of contention in contemporary clinical practice. To address the differences in anticoagulants during PCI, we meticulously conducted a literature review through PubMed and Web of Science, employing search terms such as "heparin," "bivalirudin," "percutaneous coronary intervention," and "acute coronary syndrome." For patients with PIC brought on by STEMI, NSTEMI, and stable or UA pectoris, the review focused on randomized controlled trials to assess and compare the efficacy and safety of heparin and bivalirudin as anticoagulant options. This systematic review is aimed at furnishing valuable insights into the ongoing debate surrounding the choice of anticoagulation regimens in PCI. By scrutinizing clinical evidence derived from relevant trials, we seek to inform and guide healthcare practitioners in making informed decisions based on the unique requirements of patients with various ACS presentations.
期刊介绍:
Cardiovascular Therapeutics (formerly Cardiovascular Drug Reviews) is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research and review articles focusing on cardiovascular and clinical pharmacology, as well as clinical trials of new cardiovascular therapies. Articles on translational research, pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine, device, gene and cell therapies, and pharmacoepidemiology are also encouraged.
Subject areas include (but are by no means limited to):
Acute coronary syndrome
Arrhythmias
Atherosclerosis
Basic cardiac electrophysiology
Cardiac catheterization
Cardiac remodeling
Coagulation and thrombosis
Diabetic cardiovascular disease
Heart failure (systolic HF, HFrEF, diastolic HF, HFpEF)
Hyperlipidemia
Hypertension
Ischemic heart disease
Vascular biology
Ventricular assist devices
Molecular cardio-biology
Myocardial regeneration
Lipoprotein metabolism
Radial artery access
Percutaneous coronary intervention
Transcatheter aortic and mitral valve replacement.