Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Cardiovasc Ther ; 30(4): e174-82, 2012 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21883999

RESUMO

Prasugrel, a third-generation thienopyridine antiplatelet agent, demonstrated superior efficacy to clopidogrel but with an increased risk of bleeding in the phase III pivotal registration Trial to Assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by Optimizing Platelet Inhibition with Prasugrel-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TRITON-TIMI 38). This article reviews and discusses select components of a large literature of prasugrel data that has emerged since the TRITON-TIMI 38 (TRITON) study primary disclosure.


Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/terapia , Angioplastia Coronária com Balão/efeitos adversos , Piperazinas/uso terapêutico , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas do Receptor Purinérgico P2Y/uso terapêutico , Tiofenos/uso terapêutico , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/sangue , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/mortalidade , Angioplastia Coronária com Balão/mortalidade , Interações Medicamentosas , Resistência a Medicamentos , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Infarto do Miocárdio/etiologia , Infarto do Miocárdio/mortalidade , Infarto do Miocárdio/prevenção & controle , Piperazinas/efeitos adversos , Piperazinas/farmacocinética , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/efeitos adversos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/farmacocinética , Cloridrato de Prasugrel , Antagonistas do Receptor Purinérgico P2Y/efeitos adversos , Antagonistas do Receptor Purinérgico P2Y/farmacocinética , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Tiofenos/efeitos adversos , Tiofenos/farmacocinética , Trombose/etiologia , Trombose/mortalidade , Trombose/prevenção & controle , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Crit Care ; 14(6): R229, 2010.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21176144

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Serial alterations in protein C levels appear to correlate with disease severity in patients with severe sepsis, and it may be possible to tailor severe sepsis therapy with the use of this biomarker. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dose and duration of drotrecogin alfa (activated) treatment using serial measurements of protein C compared to standard therapy in patients with severe sepsis. METHODS: This was a phase 2 multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled study. Adult patients with two or more sepsis-induced organ dysfunctions were enrolled. Protein C deficient patients were randomized to standard therapy (24 µg/kg/hr infusion for 96 hours) or alternative therapy (higher dose and/or variable duration; 24/30/36 µg/kg/hr for 48 to 168 hours). The primary outcome was a change in protein C level in the alternative therapy group, between study Day 1 and Day 7, compared to standard therapy. RESULTS: Of 557 patients enrolled, 433 patients received randomized therapy; 206 alternative, and 227 standard. Baseline characteristics of the groups were largely similar. The difference in absolute change in protein C from Day 1 to Day 7 between the two therapy groups was 7% (P = 0.011). Higher doses and longer infusions were associated with a more pronounced increase in protein C level, with no serious bleeding events. The same doses and longer infusions were associated with a larger increase in protein C level; higher rates of serious bleeding when groups received the same treatment; but no clear increased risk of bleeding during the longer infusion. This group also experienced a higher mortality rate; however, there was no clear link to infusion duration. CONCLUSIONS: The study met its primary objective of increased protein C levels in patients receiving alternative therapy demonstrating that variable doses and/or duration of drotrecogin alfa (activated) can improve protein C levels, and also provides valuable information for incorporation into potential future studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00386425.


Assuntos
Proteína C/metabolismo , Sepse/tratamento farmacológico , Idoso , Biomarcadores/sangue , Método Duplo-Cego , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Proteína C/administração & dosagem , Proteínas Recombinantes/administração & dosagem , Sepse/sangue , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
Crit Care ; 14(3): R102, 2010.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20525247

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The benefits and use of low-dose corticosteroids (LDCs) in severe sepsis and septic shock remain controversial. Surviving sepsis campaign guidelines suggest LDC use for septic shock patients poorly responsive to fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy. Their use is suspected to be wide-spread, but paucity of data regarding global practice exists. The purpose of this study was to compare baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients treated or not treated with LDC from the international PROGRESS (PROmoting Global Research Excellence in Severe Sepsis) cohort study of severe sepsis. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the PROGRESS registry were evaluated for use of vasopressor and LDC (equivalent or lesser potency to hydrocortisone 50 mg six-hourly plus 50 microg 9-alpha-fludrocortisone) for treatment of severe sepsis at any time in intensive care units (ICUs). Baseline characteristics and hospital mortality were analyzed, and logistic regression techniques used to develop propensity score and outcome models adjusted for baseline imbalances between groups. RESULTS: A total of 8,968 patients with severe sepsis and sufficient data for analysis were studied. A total of 79.8% (7,160/8,968) of patients received vasopressors, and 34.0% (3,051/8,968) of patients received LDC. Regional use of LDC was highest in Europe (51.1%) and lowest in Asia (21.6%). Country use was highest in Brazil (62.9%) and lowest in Malaysia (9.0%). A total of 14.2% of patients on LDC were not receiving any vasopressor therapy. LDC patients were older, had more co-morbidities and higher disease severity scores. Patients receiving LDC spent longer in ICU than patients who did not (median of 12 versus 8 days; P <0.001). Overall hospital mortality rates were greater in the LDC than in the non-LDC group (58.0% versus 43.0%; P <0.001). After adjusting for baseline imbalances, in all mortality models (with vasopressor use), a consistent association remained between LDC and hospital mortality (odds ratios varying from 1.30 to 1.47). CONCLUSIONS: Widespread use of LDC for the treatment of severe sepsis with significant regional and country variation exists. In this study, 14.2% of patients received LDC despite the absence of evidence of shock. Hospital mortality was higher in the LDC group and remained higher after adjustment for key determinates of mortality.


Assuntos
Corticosteroides/administração & dosagem , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Sistema de Registros , Choque Séptico/tratamento farmacológico , Vasoconstritores/uso terapêutico , Corticosteroides/farmacologia , Adulto , Idoso , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Pontuação de Propensão , Estudos Prospectivos , Choque Séptico/mortalidade , Resultado do Tratamento , Vasoconstritores/administração & dosagem , Vasoconstritores/farmacologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...