高龄急性脑梗死患者重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂静脉溶栓的疗效及安全性分析

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的探讨高龄脑梗死患者接受标准剂量重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂（r e c o m b i n a n t t i s s u e plasminogen activator，rt-PA）静脉溶栓治疗的疗效和安全性。方法对我院2011年1月～2013年12月连续收治入院的254例急性脑梗死患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析，分为老龄溶栓组118例（60＜年龄≤80岁，rt-PA静脉溶栓治疗）；高龄溶栓组62例（年龄＞80岁， rt-PA静脉溶栓治疗）；高龄非溶栓组74例（年龄＞80岁，非rt-PA静脉溶栓治疗）。比较3组入院前的一般情况，溶栓治疗前美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表（National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale，NIHSS）评分，溶栓后出血转化率及治疗7 d内致死性出血率，治疗后90 d改良Rankin量表（modifed Rankin Scale，mRS）评分和90 d的病死率。结果老龄溶栓组、高龄溶栓组和高龄非溶栓组治疗前NIHSS评分（13.0±5.3、15.1±6.6、14.1±6.6； P =0.523）无显著差异，3组的急性期事件出血转化率分别为16.9%、20.9%和21.6%，P =0.675；3组 7 d内致死性出血的发生率分别为3.3%，9.6%，7.4%，P =0.20。90 d内的病死率分别为11.0%，22.6%， 16.2%，P =0.12。老龄溶栓组和高龄溶栓组治疗后90 d的mRS评分 0～2比值分别为56.8%和38.7%，两组比值比（odds ratio，OR）为2.08；95%可信区间（confidence interval，CI）为1.11～3.86，P =0.021；两组治疗后90 d mRS评分中位数比较：2 vs 3，P =0.025。高龄溶栓组和高龄非溶栓组90 d的mRS评分 0～2比值分别为38.7%和21.6%，OR 1.81，95%CI 0.80～4.06，P =0.098；90 d mRS评分中位数比较：3 vs 5，P =0.008。结论与未溶栓的高龄患者相比，急性缺血性卒中老龄和高龄患者接受rt-PA治疗不增加急性期出血转化率和病死率。老龄组比高龄组rt-PA治疗获益大，高龄溶栓组比非溶栓组获益大。高龄组 rt-PA治疗可以改善患者90 d生活自理能力且不增加病死率。

文章导读： 高龄急性缺血性卒中患者接受重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂静脉溶栓有效，并且不显著增加症状性
颅内出血风险。

关键词: 急性脑梗死; 高龄; 重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂; 静脉溶栓; 出血转化

Abstract:

Objective To investigate the safety and effectiveness of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) therapy without endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients (≥80 years old). Methods The data were collected from January 2011 to December 2013. Intravenous rt-PA was administered to patients within 4.5 hours of stroke onset. The patients who received rt-PA therapy were stratified into two age groups: an old group (n =118, >60 and <80 years) and an elder group (n =62, ≥80 years) and the other elder group without rt-PA therapy (n =74, ≥80 years). The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores between three groups were compared before thrombolysis. The incidence of hemorrhage transformation (HT), incidence of fatal intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) within 7 days, mortality and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days were examined. Results There is no difference of NIHSS score between groups (13.0±5.3 vs 15.1±6.6 vs 14.1±6.6; P =0.523). The incidence of fatal ICH within 7 days was also not significantly different (3.3% vs 9.6% vs 7.4%, P <0.2). Odds ratio was 2.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) was 1.11~3.86 for mRS 0 to 2 at 90 days between rt-PA therapy groups (P =0.021); The median of mRS score was significantly higher 2(1~3) vs 3(1~5), P =0.025. Odds Ratio was 1.81, 95%CI was 0.8~4.06 between the elder groups with or without rt-PA therapy (P =0.098). The median of mRS score 3(1~5) vs 5(2~5), P =0.008. There are no difference of 90-day mortality in the three groups (11% vs 22.6% vs 16.2%; P =0.12). Conclusion rt-PA therapy appears to be as safe for AIS patients ≥80 years as it is for old patients. Elder patients still could benefit from rt-PA therapy, though not as effective as old patients. This therapy should not be withheld because of age.

Key words: Acute ischemic stroke; Elder age; Recombinant tissue plasminogen activator;
Intravenous thrombolysis; Hemorrhage transformation

杨建道，胡丽燕，宋彦彦，沈凌达，王少石. 高龄急性脑梗死患者重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂静脉溶栓的疗效及安全性分析[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2014, 9(11): 905-910.

YANG Jian-Dao, HU Li-Yan, SONG Yan-Yan, SHEN Lin-Da, WANG Shao-Shi.. Analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Recombinant Tissue Type Plasminogen
Activator Therapy for Elder Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke[J]. Chinese Journal of Stroke, 2014, 9(11): 905-910.

参考文献

1 Hacke W, Kaste M, Bluhmki E, et al. Thrombolysis

with alteplase 3 to 4.5 hours after acute ischemic

stroke[J]. N Engl J Med, 2008, 359:1317-1329.

2 Lees KR, Bluhmki E, von Kummer R, et al. Time

to treatment with intravenous alteplase and outcome

in stroke:an updated pooled analysis of ECASS,

ATLANTIS, NINDS, and EPITHET trials[J]. Lancet,

2010, 375:1695-1703.

3 A h me d N, Wa h l g r e n N, G r o n d M, e t a l .

Implementation and outcome of thrombolysis with

alteplase 3-4.5 h after an acute stroke:an updated

analysis from SITS-ISTR[J]. Lancet Neurol, 2010,

9:866-874.

4 Bonita R, Anderson CS, Broad JB, et al. Stroke

incidence and case fatality in Australasia. Comparison

of the Auckland and Perth population-based stroke

registers[J]. Stroke, 1994, 25:552-557.

5 Marini C, Baldassarre M, Russo T, et al. Burden of

first-ever ischemic stroke in the oldest old:evidence

from a population-based study[J]. Neurology, 2004,

62:77-81.

6 Di Carlo A, Baldereschi M, Gandolfo C, et al. Stroke

in an elderly population:incidence and impact on

survival and daily function. Italian Longitudinal Study on Aging[J]. Cerebrovasc Dis, 2003, 16:141-150.

7 中华医学会神经病学分会脑血管病学组急性缺血性

脑卒中诊治指南撰写组. 中国急性缺血性脑卒中诊治

指南2010[J]. 中华神经科杂志, 2010, 43:146-153.

8 Hacke W, Donnan G, Fieschi C, et al. Association of

outcome with early stroke treatment:pooled analysis

of ATLANTIS, ECASS, and NINDS rt-PA stroke

trials[J]. Lancet, 2004, 363:768-774.

9 Heuschmann PU, Kolominsky-Rabas PL, Roether J,

et al. Predictors of in-hospital mortality in patients

with acute ischemic stroke treated with thrombolytic

therapy[J]. JAMA, 2004, 292:1831-1838.

10 Bateman BT, Schumacher HC, Boden-Albala B, et

al. Factors associated with in-hospital mortality after

administration of thrombolysis in acute ischemic

stroke patients:an analysis of the nationwide inpatient

sample 1999 to 2002[J]. Stroke, 2006, 37:440-446.

11 张世洪, 吴波, 谈颂. 卒中登记研究中Barthel指数和改

良的Rankin量表的适用性与相关性研究[J]. 中国循证

医学杂志, 2004, 4:871-874.

12 European Stroke Organisation (ESO) Executive

Committee. ESQ Writing Committee for management

of ischaemic stroke and transient ischaemic attack

2008[J]. Cerebrovasc Dis, 2008, 25:457-507.

13 Derex L, Nighoghossian N. Thrombolysis, strokeunit

admission and early rehabilitation in elderly

patients[J]. Nat Rev Neurol, 2009, 5:506 -511.

14 Jauch EC, Saver JL, Adams HP, et al. Guidelines for

the early management of patients with acute ischemic

stroke:a guideline for health care professionals from

the American Heart Association/American Stroke

Association[J]. Stroke, 2013, 44:870-947.

15 Mishra NK, Diener HC, Lyden PD, et al. Influenec of

age on outcome from thrombolysis in acute stroke:a

controlled comparison in patients from the Virtual

Intermational Stroke Trials Archive (VISTA)[J].

Stroke, 1010, 41:2840-2848.

16 Bhatnagar P, Sinha D, Parker RA, et al. Intravenous

thrombolysis in acute ischaemic stroke:a systematic

review and meta-analysis to aid decision making in

patients over 80 years of age[J]. J Neurol Neurosurg

Psychiatry, 2011, 82:712-727.

17 Takayanagi S, Ochi T, Hanakita S, et al. The safety

and effectiveness of low dose recombinant tissue

plasminogen activator (0.6 mg/kg) therapy for elderly

acute ischemic stroke patients (>80 years old) in the

preendovascular era[J]. Neurol Med Chir(Tokyo),

2014, 54:435-440.

18 Costello CA, Campbell BC, Perez de la Ossa N,

et al. Age over 80 years is not associated with

increased hemorrhagic transformation after stroke

thrombolysis[J]. J Clin Neurosci, 2012, 19:360-363.

19 Flach M, Matosevic B, Rucker M, et al. Functional

recovery after ischemic stroke-a matter of age:data

from the Austrian stroke unit registry[J]. Neurology,

2012, 78:279-285.

[1]	鲁燕, 杨保荣, 黄向萍, 杨冠桂, 陈圣文, 李建荣, 曾小明. 县级医院急性缺血性卒中超时间窗经MRI筛选溶栓的病例对照研究 [J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2022, 17(12): 1321-1326.
[2]	仲伟斌, 王鹏飞, 于进超, 张金彪, 李振光. 支架治疗颈动脉夹层导致急性脑梗死2例报告及文献复习[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2022, 17(06): 653-657.
[3]	王拥军, 熊云云, 李子孝, 张玉梅, 杨晓萌, 王上, 霍晓川, 杨明, 谢雪微, 罗岗, 陈晓霖, 李光硕, 王利圆, 王传颖, 闫然, 王文洁, 段春苗, 路正钊. 卒中：回眸2021[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2022, 17(01): 1-20.
[4]	曹双双, 张晓燕, 王建伟, 赵磊, 陈红兵, 汪明玉. 急性缺血性卒中静脉溶栓后早期神经功能恶化影响因素分析[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(12): 1253-1258.
[5]	张心邈, 王春娟, 杨昕, 谷鸿秋, 姜英玉, 王伊龙, 赵性泉, 李子孝, 王拥军. 发病前口服抗栓药物对急性缺血性卒中患者静脉溶栓安全性的影响研究[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(11): 1110-1114.
[6]	王聪杰, 李虹, 郑丽, 刘珊, 卢海丽, 陈娜, 张斌, 周衡. 轻型缺血性卒中静脉溶栓后双重抗血小板疗效观察[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(10): 1044-1049.
[7]	北京神经科学学会血管神经病学专业委员会, 阿加曲班治疗急性缺血性卒中中国专家共识组. 阿加曲班治疗急性缺血性卒中中国专家共识2021[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(09): 946-953.
[8]	侯瑞华, 吕麦扣, 温慧军. D-二聚体与纤维蛋白原比值与青年急性脑梗死患者颈动脉粥样硬化斑块的相关性分析[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(08): 805-809.
[9]	高素颖, 秦一凡, 张会玲, 于凯, 王拥军, 冀瑞俊. 年龄与急性脑梗死患者1年预后的关系研究[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(08): 810-815.
[10]	王振, 徐伟, 贺国华, 胡珏, 冯铁桥, 童洋萍, 徐桂兰, 肖慧, 易海波, 宋治. 急性缺血性卒中静脉溶栓后远隔部位脑出血的临床特征和预后分析[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(07): 680-686.
[11]	付文华, 瞿千千, 吕海东. 乳头状心脏黏液瘤致脑栓塞超急性期桥接治疗1例报道[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(07): 730-733.
[12]	王拥军，熊云云，杨佳蕾，李光硕，闫然，王文洁，瓮佳旭，上官艺. 卒中：回眸2020[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(02): 101-118.
[13]	陈英，高亚丽，蔺芳菊，贾伟华. 伴活动性恶性肿瘤的急性缺血性卒中患者静脉溶栓的临床分析及文献回顾[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(02): 130-135.
[14]	郑亚利，于瑞晓，于永鹏，白家赫. 脑实质强化程度预测急性前循环大血管闭塞性脑梗死血管内治疗后出血转化风险研究[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2021, 16(02): 181-186.
[15]	黄丽红，刘光维. 缺血性卒中患者静脉溶栓后不良预后危险因素的研究现状[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2020, 15(12): 1352-1359.