口服抗凝治疗:疗效、安全性和低剂量争议。

Haemostasis Pub Date : 1999-01-01 DOI:10.1159/000022495
S Coccheri, G Palareti, B Cosmi
{"title":"口服抗凝治疗:疗效、安全性和低剂量争议。","authors":"S Coccheri,&nbsp;G Palareti,&nbsp;B Cosmi","doi":"10.1159/000022495","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The issue of optimal duration of oral anticoagulant therapy after a first episode of venous thromboembolism is still unresolved. However, recent data suggest that short (6 weeks to 3 months), intermediate (3- 6 months) or indefinite-term anticoagulant therapy should be adopted on the basis of the classification of patients into low-, intermediate- and high-recurrence-risk groups, respectively. Oral anticoagulants have been shown to effectively prevent cardioembolic stroke in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Recent data seem to suggest that their safety can be ameliorated with adequate risk stratification on the basis of clinical and echocardiographic features. After unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, oral anticoagulant therapy (INR range 2-3) combined with aspirin has been shown to be advantageous over aspirin alone, although at the cost of a slight increase in bleeding. Bleeding complications are major drawbacks of oral anticoagulant therapy thus limiting their generalized adoption in recognized indications. To sharply reduce the bleeding risk and need of laboratory control, the low- or fixed-dose oral anticoagulant approach has been evaluated. In primary prevention and in low or low-to-moderate thrombotic risk, minidose warfarin treatment has been shown to be advantageous. In secondary prevention, and in patients at high risk for recurrent venous or arterial thrombotic events, standard range (INR 2-3) or higher level of anticoagulation is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":12910,"journal":{"name":"Haemostasis","volume":"29 2-3","pages":"150-65"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000022495","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Oral anticoagulant therapy: efficacy, safety and the low-dose controversy.\",\"authors\":\"S Coccheri,&nbsp;G Palareti,&nbsp;B Cosmi\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000022495\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The issue of optimal duration of oral anticoagulant therapy after a first episode of venous thromboembolism is still unresolved. However, recent data suggest that short (6 weeks to 3 months), intermediate (3- 6 months) or indefinite-term anticoagulant therapy should be adopted on the basis of the classification of patients into low-, intermediate- and high-recurrence-risk groups, respectively. Oral anticoagulants have been shown to effectively prevent cardioembolic stroke in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Recent data seem to suggest that their safety can be ameliorated with adequate risk stratification on the basis of clinical and echocardiographic features. After unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, oral anticoagulant therapy (INR range 2-3) combined with aspirin has been shown to be advantageous over aspirin alone, although at the cost of a slight increase in bleeding. Bleeding complications are major drawbacks of oral anticoagulant therapy thus limiting their generalized adoption in recognized indications. To sharply reduce the bleeding risk and need of laboratory control, the low- or fixed-dose oral anticoagulant approach has been evaluated. In primary prevention and in low or low-to-moderate thrombotic risk, minidose warfarin treatment has been shown to be advantageous. In secondary prevention, and in patients at high risk for recurrent venous or arterial thrombotic events, standard range (INR 2-3) or higher level of anticoagulation is needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12910,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Haemostasis\",\"volume\":\"29 2-3\",\"pages\":\"150-65\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000022495\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Haemostasis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000022495\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Haemostasis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000022495","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

静脉血栓栓塞首次发作后口服抗凝治疗的最佳持续时间问题仍未解决。然而,最近的数据显示,在将患者分别分为低、中、高复发风险组的基础上,应采用短期(6周至3个月)、中期(3- 6个月)或无限期抗凝治疗。口服抗凝剂已被证明可以有效地预防非瓣膜性房颤的心栓性卒中。最近的数据似乎表明,在临床和超声心动图特征的基础上进行充分的风险分层,可以改善其安全性。在不稳定型心绞痛和非q波型心肌梗死后,口服抗凝治疗(INR范围2-3)联合阿司匹林已被证明优于单独使用阿司匹林,尽管以出血轻微增加为代价。出血并发症是口服抗凝治疗的主要缺点,因此限制了其在公认适应症中的广泛应用。为了大幅降低出血风险和实验室控制的需要,已经评估了低剂量或固定剂量口服抗凝方法。在初级预防和低或中低血栓形成风险中,小剂量华法林治疗已被证明是有利的。在二级预防中,对于静脉或动脉血栓事件复发风险高的患者,需要标准范围(INR 2-3)或更高水平的抗凝治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Oral anticoagulant therapy: efficacy, safety and the low-dose controversy.

The issue of optimal duration of oral anticoagulant therapy after a first episode of venous thromboembolism is still unresolved. However, recent data suggest that short (6 weeks to 3 months), intermediate (3- 6 months) or indefinite-term anticoagulant therapy should be adopted on the basis of the classification of patients into low-, intermediate- and high-recurrence-risk groups, respectively. Oral anticoagulants have been shown to effectively prevent cardioembolic stroke in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Recent data seem to suggest that their safety can be ameliorated with adequate risk stratification on the basis of clinical and echocardiographic features. After unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, oral anticoagulant therapy (INR range 2-3) combined with aspirin has been shown to be advantageous over aspirin alone, although at the cost of a slight increase in bleeding. Bleeding complications are major drawbacks of oral anticoagulant therapy thus limiting their generalized adoption in recognized indications. To sharply reduce the bleeding risk and need of laboratory control, the low- or fixed-dose oral anticoagulant approach has been evaluated. In primary prevention and in low or low-to-moderate thrombotic risk, minidose warfarin treatment has been shown to be advantageous. In secondary prevention, and in patients at high risk for recurrent venous or arterial thrombotic events, standard range (INR 2-3) or higher level of anticoagulation is needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信