ABSTRACT
Resumen La fibrilación auricular no valvular (FA) es la arritmia con potencial embolígeno más prevalente y una de las principales y crecientes causas de accidente cerebrovas cular isquémico (ACVi). El principal objetivo del uso de la anticoagulación en pacientes con FA es la prevención del ACVi. Hasta hace poco tiempo, la anticoagulación con antagonistas de la vitamina K (AVKs) era la única opción disponible. Los anticoagulantes orales directos (DOACs) como el inhibidor directo de la trombina, dabigatrán, o los inhibidores directos del factor Xa, rivaroxabán, apixa bán y edoxabán, tienen un perfil de efectividad/seguridad más favorable en comparación con los AVKs. No existen estudios que comparen la efectividad de los DOACs entre sí. La elección del DOAC depende de múltiples factores específicos del paciente, preferencias del médico, costos y accesibilidad. Entre 1-2% de los pacientes correctamente tratados con un DOAC intercurre con un ACVi cada año. La posibilidad de contar con un agente reversor debería ser tenida en cuenta al momento de la elección del DOAC, especialmente por el riesgo residual de ocurrencia de ACVi. En la actualidad, en nuestro país solo el dabigatrán cuenta con un agente reversor disponible y lo convierte en el único DOAC que no contraindica el uso de trombolisis intraveno sa con rtPA. Esta situación debería ser considerada en el momento de la elección del DOAC para la prevención de eventos tromboembólicos en pacientes con FA.
Abstract Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most preva lent arrhythmia with high embolic potential, and one of the main and growing causes of stroke. The main objec tive of anticoagulation in patients with AF is prevention of stroke. Until recently, anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) was the only available option. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), such as the direct thrombin inhibitor dabigatran, or the direct factor Xa inhibitors rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban, have a more favor able effectiveness/safety profile compared to VKAs. There are no studies comparing the efficacy of DOACs with each other. The choice of a DOAC arose from patient car achterictis, physician preferences, cost, and accessibility. Between 1-2% of patients correctly treated with a DOAC experience a stroke each year. The possibility of having a reversal agent should be taken into account when choos ing a DOAC, especially due to the residual risk of stroke occurrences even under DOACs. Currently, in our country only dabigatran has a reversing agent available, making it the only DOAC that does not contraindicate the use of intravenous thrombolysis. This should be taken into account when choosing the DOAC for the prevention of thromboembolic events in patients with AF.
ABSTRACT
Objective To examine the effects of intravenous thrombolysis with Tissue-type plasminogen activator (rt-PA) combined with mild hypothermia therapy on patients with acute cerebral infarction and further investigate under?lying mechanism for the treatment of cerebral infarction. Methods Sixty cases of cerebral infarction patients were random?ly divided into three groups with 20 patients in each group:①The control group was given rt-PA intravenous thromboly?sis;②The treatment group 1:intravenous thrombolytic therapy combined with local mild hypothermia treatment for 12 h;③The treatment group 2:intravenous thrombolytic therapy and local mild hypothermia in the treatment of 24 h. We col?lected NIHSS score before and after thrombolytic therapy, patient monitoring (ICP) changes during thrombolytic therapy, March (MRS) score and complications during follow-up after thrombolysis, The serum levels of SOD and MDA were as? sessed before and after thrombolytic therapy. Results NIHSS score was lower in both treatment group 1 and treatment group 2 than in the control group (P0.05). Conclusion Rt-PA intravenous thrombolysis combined with mild hypothermia treatment can improve the prognosis of patients with cerebral infarction without increasing the inci?dence of adverse reactions. In addition, thrombolysis combined with mild hypothermia 24 h has better effect than with mild hypothermia 12 h. The beneficial effects may be accomplished by reducing oxidative stress reaction.