ABSTRACT
Objective:To investigate the effects of different light sources on the stability of cinepazide maleate in sodium chloride solution, providing a theoretical basis for standardizing operation for avoiding light in clinical medication.Methods:First, a standard curve was created and methodological studies were conducted. Then, intravenous drip solutions were prepared using clinically prescribed methods. Then, the absorbance of the solution of cinepazide maleate injection under outdoor light, light emitting diode (LED) light, indoor light, artificial sunlight with a color temperature of 6 500 K (D65), and under a shading condition for 1, 2, 3, and 7 hours were brought into the standard curve to obtain the concentrations, and the change of the concentrations was studied.Results:There was no light decomposition phenomenon of cinepazide maleate injection in the shading group (control group) within 7 hours. In the other four experimental groups, there was no obvious light decomposition phenomenon of cinepazide maleate injection in the LED light group. Compared with the shading group, cinepazide maleate injection in the indoor, outdoor, and D65 groups began to exhibit a light decomposition phenomenon at 1 hour ( F = 44 840.44, P < 0.001). At 2 hours, cinepazide maleate content in the outdoor and D65 groups began to decrease significantly compared with the shading group ( F = 15 459.12, P < 0.001). At 7 hours, cinepazide maleate exhibited significantly greater light decomposition in the outdoor group [(29.84 ± 0.43) L·mol -1·cm -1] and D65 group [(21.01 ± 0.51) L·mol -1·cm -1] than the shading group [(101.65 ± 1.5) L·mol -1·cm -1] ( F = 63 106.32, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in cinepazide maleate content between LED and shading groups ( P > 0.05). Conclusion:Cinepazide maleate injection is stable under the common LED light source and therefore it is not necessary to take lightproof operation. Cinepazide maleate injection is unstable under indoor, outdoor, and D65 light sources, and it is necessary to take lightproof operation.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE:To compare the efficacy and safety of dabigatran and warfarin respectively used in atrial fibrillation patients after radiofrequency ablation(RFCA). METHODS:Data of 141 nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients,who scheduled for RFCA,were retrospectively analyzed and divided into warfarin group(71 cases)and dabigatran group(70 cases)by different med-ication. Patients in warfarin group should stop warfarin if they took before,then changed to Low molecular weight heparin calcium injection 100 U/kg,subcutaneous injection,taking RFCA when INR was lower than 1.5,stopping low molecular weight heparin 12 h before surgery;Low molecular weight heparin calcium injection 100 U/kg was intravenously injected when surgery;orally tak-ing Warfarin sodium tablet 4.5 mg after 4-6 h,once a day,meanwhile bridged overlapping treated at least 3-5 d with low molecu-lar weight heparin;monitoring once INR every 3 d after surgery,maintaining INR 2.0-3.0,taking warfalin at least 3 months. Pa-tients in dabigatran group stopped taking the anticoagulant drugs when admission,then changed to Dabigatran etexilate capsule 110 mg(age≥70 years old or body mass0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Dabigatran has similar anticoagulant efficacy and safety with warfarin in atrial fibrillation pa-tients after RFCA.
ABSTRACT
Objective:To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of anticoagulant therapy with rivaroxaban in atrial fibrillation( AF) pa-tients after radiofrequency catheter ablation( RFCA) . Methods:A retrospective analysis was performed in the study. Totally 141 AF pa-tients with RFCA in our hospital were enrolled from January 2014 to October 2015. The patients were divided into rivaroxaban group(70 patients)and warfarin group (71 patients). In rivaroxaban group,rivaroxaban(10 mg, po,qd)was given for at least 3 months after RFCA. In warfarin group,low molecular heparin (100 IU·kg-1,ih) was given before RFCA, and standard dose of warfarin (3-5 mg,po,qd) was given for at least 3 months by adjusting the INR within the range of 2. 0-3. 0 after RFCA as bridging therapy. The death rate, throm-boem bolism events and bleeding events between the groups were evaluated and companed groups. Results: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the groups except the diastolic pressure. There were no significant differences in the death and thromboembolism events(transient cerebral ischemia , ischemic encephalopathy, 2/70 vs 4/71,P>0. 05)between the groups. There were no TIMI major bleeding events in both groups. There were no significant differences in minor bleeding events between the groups (3/70 vs 4/71,P>0. 05). Conclusion: Compared with those of warfarin,the effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban show the similar effect in AF patients after RFCA. Rivaroxaban can be safely and effectively used in AF patients with low or middle risk of thromboembo-lism after RFCA.