利伐沙班与华法林用于心房颤动导管消融术后抗凝疗效对比

目的比较利伐沙班与华法林在心房颤动(房颤)患者导管消融术后的抗凝效果。方法选取2013年3月~2015年4月榆林市星元医院老年病科和普外科的房颤行射频消融术患者100例,其中男性57例,女性43例,年龄36~78岁。随机分为利伐沙班组和华法林组,各50例。华法林组患者术后2.5 mg/日华法林,利伐沙班组术后利伐沙班10 mg/日进行治疗。三个月后观察疗效。治疗前后检测两组患者的国际标准化比率(INR)。统计治疗期间两组患者血栓栓塞发生情况和出血情况。结果利伐沙班组治疗后INR高于华法林组[(2.6±0.4)vs.(1.9±0.5)],差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。利伐沙班组有41例患者达标,达标率为82.0%,华法林组有25例患者达标,达标率为50.0%,利伐沙班组达标率高于华法林组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。利伐沙班组患者发生外周血栓栓塞1例(2.0%),轻微出血1例(2.0%)。华法林组患者发生血栓栓塞2例(4.0%),分别为外周血栓和脑血栓,轻微出血5例,少量出血4例,严重出血1例。利伐沙班组出血率显著低于华法林组(2%vs.20.0%),差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论利伐沙班较华法林可显著提高行导管射频消融术的房颤患者抗凝效果,降低患者出血发生率,疗效安全可靠。     

利伐沙班用于持续性心房颤动合并2型糖尿病高龄患者抗凝治疗安全性的研究

目的:观察新型口服抗凝药利伐沙班用于高龄(>80岁)患者持续性心房颤动(PerAF)合并2型糖尿病抗凝治疗的安全性和有效性。方法:选取2014年9月至2018年12月于天津市第五中心医院门诊就诊的高龄PerAF合并2型糖尿病患者共141例,118例患者完成随访,入选本研究,患者随机分为利伐沙班组(A组, n...     

心房颤动导管消融术后抗凝治疗研究进展

<正>心房颤动住院患者的脑卒中发生率达24.8%,其中超过80岁的老年患者脑卒中发生率高达32.86%〔1〕。随着心房颤动(房颤)导管消融术的临床推广,接受这种治疗的患者也越来越多。房颤消融术后的抗凝治疗有重要的实践意义〔2〕。1目前抗凝治疗方法及现状抗凝治疗是房颤消融术后的重要部分,目前临床上依然根据患者的血栓栓塞危险分层来选择抗栓药物,最常用的危险分层工具是〔(CHADS2)评分(心力衰竭、高血压、年龄75岁和     

利伐沙班在高龄非瓣膜性心房颤动患者中的安全性评价

目的 探讨高龄非瓣膜性心房颤动(房颤)患者口服利伐沙班的安全性.方法 回顾性分析2018年1月-2019年3月,复旦大学附属静安区中心医院心内科门诊或病房≥60岁口服利伐沙班的非瓣膜性房颤患者相关资料,根据患者的年龄分为≥80岁高龄组(n=104)和＜80岁低龄组(n=56).随访患者出血等并发症临床情况.结果 160...     

抗凝新药利伐沙班临床研究进展

现有抗凝药物因出血、频繁监测等原因致使临床使用受限,作为Ⅹa因子直接抑制剂,小分子口服药物利伐沙班具有明确的药代动力学及药效动力学改变,目前正在临床试验阶段,且有望能够取代传统抗凝药物。     

利伐沙班与华法林预防心房颤动导管消融术后血栓事件的对比研究

目的对比研究利伐沙班与华法林预防心房颤动(简称房颤)导管消融术后血栓形成的疗效及安全性。方法入选符合标准的226例房颤患者,随机分为治疗组和对照组,两组患者均行房颤导管消融治疗。治疗组108例导管消融术后口服利伐沙班15 mg/d或20 mg/d,对照组118例术后给予华法林抗凝,华法林均是3 mg/d起始,根据国际标准化比值调整华法林剂量。两组患者随访3个月,比较两组患者栓塞发生率、死亡率和出血发生率。结果两组均无栓塞及死亡发生。两组均无大出血及脑出血事件发生,轻度出血事件治疗组与对照组无差异(7.4%vs 8.5%,P0.05)。结论与华法林相比,利伐沙班预防房颤导管消融术后患者栓塞事件同样有效。     

心房颤动导管消融术后抗凝策略

导管消融术已成为治疗心房颤动的一种有效手段,术后不少于3个月的抗凝能够有效降低栓塞风险。然而,3个月后是否需长期抗凝治疗尚未明确。目前,多个观察性研究表明低卒中风险患者消融成功术后3个月后可停服抗凝药物。     

利伐沙班与华法林预防心房颤动脑卒中安全性的对比

心房颤动使缺血性脑卒中的危险性增加[1],维生素K拮抗剂的应用对非瓣膜性心房颤动预防脑卒中具有良好效果[2],但是,食物与药物之间的相互作用需要经常对血液凝固情况进行监测,并对药物进行必要的调整,临床实际中某些患者应用这些药物存在诸多困难[3].利伐沙班(Rivaroxaban)直接抑制因子Xa,与华法林相比能提供更持久及理想的抗凝效果[4].利伐沙班预防静脉血栓比依诺肝素(enoxaparin)更有效[5].本研究目的在于比较心房颤动病人每日一次口服利伐沙班及华法林预防脑卒中和血栓形成的效果.     

利伐沙班与华法林治疗稳定性冠心病合并心房颤动的效果及安全性

目的 对比利伐沙班与华法林在稳定性冠心病合并心房颤动患者中的效果及安全性。方法 选取2020年1月至2021年11月我院收治的稳定性冠心病合并心房颤动患者318例,随机分为常规组与实验组,每组159例。常规组给予华法林治疗,实验组给予利伐沙班片治疗,两组患者连续服药12个月。比较两组治疗前后肌酸激酶同工酶（creatine kinase isoenzymes,CK-MB）、乳酸脱氢酶（lactate dehydrogenase,LDH）水平以及心房颤动发作频率、发作持续时间、发作时ST段压低程度及出血事件发生情况。结果 经由临床治疗,两组的CK-MB、LDH水平均降低,心房颤动发作频率、发作持续时间以及发作时ST段压低程度均降低,且实验组的各指标改善情况显著优于常规组,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。实验组的出血事件发生率为8.18%,显著低于常规组的23.90%,差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。结论 利伐沙班在治疗稳定性冠心病合并心房颤动方面具有显著的抗凝效果,能够有效减少心肌缺血症状,降低出血事件的发生,安全性更高。     

高龄老年非瓣膜性心房颤动患者使用利伐沙班抗凝治疗单中心经验

目的 了解解放军总医院第二医学中心利伐沙班在高龄老年非瓣膜性心房颤动患者中的应用情况,进一步规范抗凝治疗.方法 连续入选解放军总医院第二医学中心于2012年10月至2017年11月使用利伐沙班的老年非瓣膜性心房颤动住院患者159例,检测应用利伐沙班前后的肝、肾功能及凝血指标,最长随访48月,记录观察期间的致死性出血、心...     

心房颤动消融术后应用达比加群酯和华法林抗凝疗效观察

目的研究达比加群酯在心房颤动(简称房颤)射频消融术后抗凝治疗的有效性及安全性。方法选择已行导管射频消融术治疗的房颤患者,按应用口服抗凝药物的不同分为华法林组和达比加群酯组。收集所有患者的年龄、性别、房颤类型、凝血及肝肾功能等基本指标。所有患者符合入选及排除标准,均于射频消融术后应用达比加群酯或华法林行抗凝治疗。对患者进行3个月随访,以血栓性终点与安全性终点为研究终点,对比两组患者的临床疗效和出血风险。结果华法林组133例,达比加群酯组98例。两组间性别、年龄、房颤类型、伴随疾病及吸烟史等无差异。与华法林组比较,达比加群酯组血栓栓塞事件发生率无差异(4.08%vs 4.51%,P0.05)。严重出血事件更低(1.02%vs 6.77%,P0.05)。达比加群酯组及华法林组均有少量出血事件发生,两组发生率无差异(31.63%vs 33.08,P0.05)。结论达比加群酯对房颤射频消融术后抗凝治疗的效果与华法林相当,但安全性更高。     

经导管射频消融治疗老年阵发性心房颤动的有效性和安全性

目的 研究老年阵发性心房颤动（房颤）患者接受经导管射频消融的有效性与安全性.方法 71例阵发性房颤患者根据年龄分为中青年组（＜65岁）和老年组（≥65岁）.应用环肺静脉线性消融电隔离术根治房颤.随访时间为6～36个月.比较两组射频消融治疗房颤的手术成功率、手术时间、并发症等指标.结果 老年组首次手术成功率为88.89%,中青年组为77.78%,两组间无统计学差异（P=0.343）.老年组与中青年组手术时间分别为（197.4±2.63） min及（200.3±2.65） min,两组间无统计学差异（P＞0.343）.曝光时间老年组长于中青年组（P＜0.01）.两组各发生1例穿刺部位血肿并发症,均未出现心包填塞、肺静脉狭窄及左房食管瘘等严重并发症.结论 与中青年相比,老年阵发性房颤患者接受经导管环肺静脉线性消融同样安全、有效.     

达比加群酯在阵发性心房颤动射频消融术后抗凝治疗的临床应用

目的探讨达比加群酯在阵发性心房颤动(简称房颤)射频消融术后抗凝治疗的安全性。方法将60例阵发性房颤射频消融术后患者,随机分为达比加群酯组(30例)和华法林组(30例),观察两组患者射频消融术后抗凝治疗的安全性。结果达比加群酯组及华法林组均无血栓栓塞及大出血并发症发生,而少量出血并发症的发生率与华法林相似,两组在血栓栓塞及出血并发症方面差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。与华法林组比较,达比加群酯组的D-二聚体水平减低[(0.25±0.16)mg/L vs(0.45±0.25)mg/L,P0.05],术后住院时间减少[(3.05±0.32)d vs(7.27±0.25)d,P0.05]。结论阵发性房颤射频消融术后应用达比加群酯是安全的。     

Long-term follow-up after radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation

Aims: Data on long-term follow-up of patients who have undergone catheterablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) are very limited. Thisreport aimed at presenting clinical outcome and AF-free survivalafter pulmonary vein (PV) isolation over an extended (>3years) follow-up period. Methods and results: Thirty-nine patients subjected to PV isolation for paroxysmalAF were followed-up for at least 3 years according to a strictprotocol. Fourteen patients (35.8%) had one, 19 patients (50%)had two, and 6 patients (15.4%) had three ablation procedures.At end of follow-up (42.2 ± 6.0 months), 17 patients(43.5%) were completely free of AF or other atrial arrhythmia,and 26 patients (66.6%) had symptomatic improvement. The long-termsuccess rate was 21.4% for patients subjected to a single ablationprocedure, 52.6% for patients subjected to two catheter ablationprocedures, and 66.7% for patients who underwent three ablationprocedures (P = 0.094). There was also a trend for patientswho underwent a combination of different ablation procedures(ostial, antral, and/or circumferential) to have a higher AF-freesurvival when compared with patients subjected to the same procedure(P-value for log-rank test = 0.036). Conclusion: Catheter ablation does not eliminate paroxysmal AF in up to56% of patients in the long term, despite the use of two orthree ablation procedures in two-thirds of them. However, itconfers symptomatic improvement in 67% of treated patients.     

Left atrial flutter after radiofrequency catheter ablation of focal atrial fibrillation

We report an arrhythmic complication in two patients in whom a procedure directed at isolating one or two pulmonary veins had been performed. The complication was related to pulmonary vein disconnection scars after ablation. Both patients developed new clinical tachycardia (atypical atrial flutter) secondary to a reentrant phenomena in the vicinity of a previously ablated pulmonary vein.     

阵发性房颤经导管射频消融与药物治疗的对比评价

目的比较阵发性房颤经导管射频消融与抗心律失常药物治疗的长期疗效。方法连续入选阵发性房颤患者26例,给予CARTO指导下的射频消融环肺静脉电隔离术,配对入选26例房颤患者,给予药物治疗。临床随访观察房颤、房速的发生情况。结果平均随访28.7个月。消融组患者73.1%消融成功,药物治疗对照组11.5%无房颤发作,差异有统计学意义(P0.001)。结论研究结果提示,阵发性房颤患者射频消融治疗的长期效果明显优于药物治疗。     

房颤射频导管消融术后心功能与左房内径的变化(英文)

目的:观察射频导管消融术(RFCA)治疗心房纤颤(房颤)的疗效及术后心功能和左房内径的变化。方法:回顾分析本院28例有明显临床症状且药物治疗无效,接受RFC治疗的房颤患者的资料。在三维电解剖标测(EAM)系统指导下对该28例房颤患者行射频消融术。术前,术后3、6月用心脏超声仪评价心功能及左房内径的变化;行动态血压监测评价RFCA的疗效;结果:所有患者的肺静脉隔离率为100%。术中术后均未出现严重并发症。随访6个月28例患者中有27例(96.4%)未复发房颤,与术前比较,心脏超声检查示左房内径[(37.3±4.8)mm比(34.1±4.6)mm]明显降低,左室射血分数[(59.8±8.7)%比(64.2±6.8)%]明显提高,P均<0.05。结论:射频导管消融术治疗房颤安全有效,心功能和左房内径均有明显改善。     

Symptomatic and asymptomatic atrial fibrillation in patients undergoing radiofrequency catheter ablation

INTRODUCTION: The goals of this study were to (i) evaluate the feasibility and results of monitoring patients prior to and following catheter ablation of AF with the mobile cardiac outpatient telemetry (MCOT) system and to (ii) correlate symptoms and the presence or absence of atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 19 consecutive patients (12 men [63%]; age 60 +/- 6 years) with highly symptomatic drug refractory AF underwent catheter ablation. Each was provided with a MCOT monitor (CardioNet, USA) and asked to wear it 5 days immediately before the ablation, and 5 days per month starting with the ablation for 6 consecutive months. When patients experienced any symptoms, they were asked to activate the system and to record associated symptoms. A total of 494 days (11,856 hours) were monitored. Out of the total 390 events triggered by patient's symptoms, 40% were confirmed as AF events (156) and 60% were confirmed as non-AF events (234). Only shortness of breath and chest discomfort were highly associated with AF (P < 0.05). At the end of 6 months of follow-up, out of 10 patients that completed the study, 7 (70%) patients were free of symptomatic AF recurrences whereas only 5 (50%) patients achieved success when asymptomatic AF recurrences were included in the outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate the potential utility of wireless monitoring systems in the follow-up of AF ablation patients, while also identifying poor patient compliance with an intensive monitoring protocol as an important limitation.     

Left atrial appendage size is a marker of atrial fibrillation recurrence after radiofrequency catheter ablation in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation

IntroductionThere are no consistently confirmed predictors of atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence after catheter ablation. Therefore, we aimed to study whether left atrial appendage volume (LAAV) and function influence the long‐term recurrence of AF after catheter ablation, depending on AF type.MethodsAF patients who underwent point‐by‐point radiofrequency catheter ablation after cardiac computed tomography (CT) were included in this analysis. LAAV and LAA orifice area were measured by CT. Uni‐ and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models were performed to determine the predictors of AF recurrence.ResultsIn total, 561 AF patients (61.9 ± 10.2 years, 34.9% females) were included in the study. Recurrence of AF was detected in 40.8% of the cases (34.6% in patients with paroxysmal and 53.5% in those with persistent AF) with a median recurrence‐free time of 22.7 (9.3–43.1) months. Patients with persistent AF had significantly higher body surface area‐indexed LAV, LAAV, and LAA orifice area and lower LAA flow velocity, than those with paroxysmal AF. After adjustment left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50% (HR = 2.17; 95% CI = 1.38–3.43; p < .001) and LAAV (HR = 1.06; 95% CI = 1.01–1.12; p = .029) were independently associated with AF recurrence in persistent AF, while no independent predictors could be identified in paroxysmal AF.ConclusionThe current study demonstrates that beyond left ventricular systolic dysfunction, LAA enlargement is associated with higher rate of AF recurrence after catheter ablation in persistent AF, but not in patients with paroxysmal AF.