Comparison of intracoronary vs. intravenous administration of abciximab in coronary stenting
There have been animal and human studies looking at intracoronary (IC) use of abciximab with good short‐term clinical outcomes. There exists no data comparing intracoronary with intravenous (IV) administration of abciximab beyond 30 days. We compared the clinical outcomes between the IC (n = 101) an...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions 2004-01, Vol.61 (1), p.31-34 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 34 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 31 |
| container_title | Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions |
| container_volume | 61 |
| creator | Kakkar, Aman K. Moustapha, Ali Hanley, Henry G. Weiss, Mitchell Caldito, Gloria Misra, Praphul Reddy, Pratap C. Tandon, Neeraj |
| description | There have been animal and human studies looking at intracoronary (IC) use of abciximab with good short‐term clinical outcomes. There exists no data comparing intracoronary with intravenous (IV) administration of abciximab beyond 30 days. We compared the clinical outcomes between the IC (n = 101) and IV (n = 72) group of patients. Patients who had coronary stenting and received abciximab were included in the study. All the patients received the standard systemic bolus dose of abciximab 0.25 mg/kg either via the IC or IV route, followed by a 12‐hr IV infusion at 0.125 μg/kg/min. The 6‐month composite endpoint of death or myocardial infarction was slightly higher in the IV (13.9%) than in the IC group (5.9%; P = 0.04). The frequency of bleeding complications was similar in both groups. The IC bolus route of abciximab may be superior to the intravenous route. Prospective randomized trials are warranted to validate these findings. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004;61:31–34. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/ccd.10730 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_80075286</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>80075286</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4250-34fc9b221ea01fa90b90ab063962d0a58ecf6d9d2615a2a061d0ad7f70743f8f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEtLxDAUhYMoPkYX_gHpSnBR5yZtk2Yp9Qmjgg90IYQ0TSTax5h0dObfG-2oK1f3cvjO4XAQ2sVwiAHIWKkqPCyBFbSJM0JiRujj6vLHPKUbaMv7FwDglPB1tIFTyinO6CZ6KrpmKp31XRt1JrJt76TqXNdKt4je_eGgvOu2m_lIVo1trQ9CbwdelsrObSPLwEW_Pt_rtrft8zZaM7L2emd5R-j-9OSuOI8n12cXxdEkVinJIE5So3hJCNYSsJEcSg6yBJqEthXILNfK0IpXJFSWRALFQa2YYcDSxOQmGaH9IXfqureZ9r1orFe6rmWrQ2-RA7CM5DSABwOoXOe900ZMXWjvFgKD-JpShCnF95SB3VuGzspGV3_kcrsAjAfgw9Z68X-SKIrjn8h4cIQN9fzXId2roCxhmXi4OhMJvmG35_xS4OQTMTGN0Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>80075286</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of intracoronary vs. intravenous administration of abciximab in coronary stenting</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Kakkar, Aman K. ; Moustapha, Ali ; Hanley, Henry G. ; Weiss, Mitchell ; Caldito, Gloria ; Misra, Praphul ; Reddy, Pratap C. ; Tandon, Neeraj</creator><creatorcontrib>Kakkar, Aman K. ; Moustapha, Ali ; Hanley, Henry G. ; Weiss, Mitchell ; Caldito, Gloria ; Misra, Praphul ; Reddy, Pratap C. ; Tandon, Neeraj</creatorcontrib><description>There have been animal and human studies looking at intracoronary (IC) use of abciximab with good short‐term clinical outcomes. There exists no data comparing intracoronary with intravenous (IV) administration of abciximab beyond 30 days. We compared the clinical outcomes between the IC (n = 101) and IV (n = 72) group of patients. Patients who had coronary stenting and received abciximab were included in the study. All the patients received the standard systemic bolus dose of abciximab 0.25 mg/kg either via the IC or IV route, followed by a 12‐hr IV infusion at 0.125 μg/kg/min. The 6‐month composite endpoint of death or myocardial infarction was slightly higher in the IV (13.9%) than in the IC group (5.9%; P = 0.04). The frequency of bleeding complications was similar in both groups. The IC bolus route of abciximab may be superior to the intravenous route. Prospective randomized trials are warranted to validate these findings. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004;61:31–34. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1522-1946</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1522-726X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/ccd.10730</identifier><identifier>PMID: 14696156</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><subject>Aged ; Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary - methods ; Antibodies, Monoclonal - administration & dosage ; Combined Modality Therapy ; Coronary Artery Disease - therapy ; Female ; glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors ; Humans ; Immunoglobulin Fab Fragments - administration & dosage ; Infusions, Intra-Arterial ; Infusions, Intravenous ; local delivery ; Male ; Middle Aged ; outcomes ; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors - administration & dosage ; Platelet Glycoprotein GPIIb-IIIa Complex - antagonists & inhibitors ; Prosthesis Implantation - methods ; stenting ; Stents ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions, 2004-01, Vol.61 (1), p.31-34</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4250-34fc9b221ea01fa90b90ab063962d0a58ecf6d9d2615a2a061d0ad7f70743f8f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4250-34fc9b221ea01fa90b90ab063962d0a58ecf6d9d2615a2a061d0ad7f70743f8f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fccd.10730$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fccd.10730$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14696156$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kakkar, Aman K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moustapha, Ali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hanley, Henry G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weiss, Mitchell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caldito, Gloria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Misra, Praphul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reddy, Pratap C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tandon, Neeraj</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of intracoronary vs. intravenous administration of abciximab in coronary stenting</title><title>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions</title><addtitle>Cathet. Cardiovasc. Intervent</addtitle><description>There have been animal and human studies looking at intracoronary (IC) use of abciximab with good short‐term clinical outcomes. There exists no data comparing intracoronary with intravenous (IV) administration of abciximab beyond 30 days. We compared the clinical outcomes between the IC (n = 101) and IV (n = 72) group of patients. Patients who had coronary stenting and received abciximab were included in the study. All the patients received the standard systemic bolus dose of abciximab 0.25 mg/kg either via the IC or IV route, followed by a 12‐hr IV infusion at 0.125 μg/kg/min. The 6‐month composite endpoint of death or myocardial infarction was slightly higher in the IV (13.9%) than in the IC group (5.9%; P = 0.04). The frequency of bleeding complications was similar in both groups. The IC bolus route of abciximab may be superior to the intravenous route. Prospective randomized trials are warranted to validate these findings. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004;61:31–34. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary - methods</subject><subject>Antibodies, Monoclonal - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Combined Modality Therapy</subject><subject>Coronary Artery Disease - therapy</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immunoglobulin Fab Fragments - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Infusions, Intra-Arterial</subject><subject>Infusions, Intravenous</subject><subject>local delivery</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>outcomes</subject><subject>Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Platelet Glycoprotein GPIIb-IIIa Complex - antagonists & inhibitors</subject><subject>Prosthesis Implantation - methods</subject><subject>stenting</subject><subject>Stents</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1522-1946</issn><issn>1522-726X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kEtLxDAUhYMoPkYX_gHpSnBR5yZtk2Yp9Qmjgg90IYQ0TSTax5h0dObfG-2oK1f3cvjO4XAQ2sVwiAHIWKkqPCyBFbSJM0JiRujj6vLHPKUbaMv7FwDglPB1tIFTyinO6CZ6KrpmKp31XRt1JrJt76TqXNdKt4je_eGgvOu2m_lIVo1trQ9CbwdelsrObSPLwEW_Pt_rtrft8zZaM7L2emd5R-j-9OSuOI8n12cXxdEkVinJIE5So3hJCNYSsJEcSg6yBJqEthXILNfK0IpXJFSWRALFQa2YYcDSxOQmGaH9IXfqureZ9r1orFe6rmWrQ2-RA7CM5DSABwOoXOe900ZMXWjvFgKD-JpShCnF95SB3VuGzspGV3_kcrsAjAfgw9Z68X-SKIrjn8h4cIQN9fzXId2roCxhmXi4OhMJvmG35_xS4OQTMTGN0Q</recordid><startdate>200401</startdate><enddate>200401</enddate><creator>Kakkar, Aman K.</creator><creator>Moustapha, Ali</creator><creator>Hanley, Henry G.</creator><creator>Weiss, Mitchell</creator><creator>Caldito, Gloria</creator><creator>Misra, Praphul</creator><creator>Reddy, Pratap C.</creator><creator>Tandon, Neeraj</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200401</creationdate><title>Comparison of intracoronary vs. intravenous administration of abciximab in coronary stenting</title><author>Kakkar, Aman K. ; Moustapha, Ali ; Hanley, Henry G. ; Weiss, Mitchell ; Caldito, Gloria ; Misra, Praphul ; Reddy, Pratap C. ; Tandon, Neeraj</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4250-34fc9b221ea01fa90b90ab063962d0a58ecf6d9d2615a2a061d0ad7f70743f8f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary - methods</topic><topic>Antibodies, Monoclonal - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Combined Modality Therapy</topic><topic>Coronary Artery Disease - therapy</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immunoglobulin Fab Fragments - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Infusions, Intra-Arterial</topic><topic>Infusions, Intravenous</topic><topic>local delivery</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>outcomes</topic><topic>Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Platelet Glycoprotein GPIIb-IIIa Complex - antagonists & inhibitors</topic><topic>Prosthesis Implantation - methods</topic><topic>stenting</topic><topic>Stents</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kakkar, Aman K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moustapha, Ali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hanley, Henry G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weiss, Mitchell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caldito, Gloria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Misra, Praphul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reddy, Pratap C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tandon, Neeraj</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kakkar, Aman K.</au><au>Moustapha, Ali</au><au>Hanley, Henry G.</au><au>Weiss, Mitchell</au><au>Caldito, Gloria</au><au>Misra, Praphul</au><au>Reddy, Pratap C.</au><au>Tandon, Neeraj</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of intracoronary vs. intravenous administration of abciximab in coronary stenting</atitle><jtitle>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions</jtitle><addtitle>Cathet. Cardiovasc. Intervent</addtitle><date>2004-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>61</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>31</spage><epage>34</epage><pages>31-34</pages><issn>1522-1946</issn><eissn>1522-726X</eissn><abstract>There have been animal and human studies looking at intracoronary (IC) use of abciximab with good short‐term clinical outcomes. There exists no data comparing intracoronary with intravenous (IV) administration of abciximab beyond 30 days. We compared the clinical outcomes between the IC (n = 101) and IV (n = 72) group of patients. Patients who had coronary stenting and received abciximab were included in the study. All the patients received the standard systemic bolus dose of abciximab 0.25 mg/kg either via the IC or IV route, followed by a 12‐hr IV infusion at 0.125 μg/kg/min. The 6‐month composite endpoint of death or myocardial infarction was slightly higher in the IV (13.9%) than in the IC group (5.9%; P = 0.04). The frequency of bleeding complications was similar in both groups. The IC bolus route of abciximab may be superior to the intravenous route. Prospective randomized trials are warranted to validate these findings. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004;61:31–34. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.</abstract><cop>Hoboken</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</pub><pmid>14696156</pmid><doi>10.1002/ccd.10730</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1522-1946 |
| ispartof | Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions, 2004-01, Vol.61 (1), p.31-34 |
| issn | 1522-1946 1522-726X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_80075286 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Aged Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary - methods Antibodies, Monoclonal - administration & dosage Combined Modality Therapy Coronary Artery Disease - therapy Female glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors Humans Immunoglobulin Fab Fragments - administration & dosage Infusions, Intra-Arterial Infusions, Intravenous local delivery Male Middle Aged outcomes Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors - administration & dosage Platelet Glycoprotein GPIIb-IIIa Complex - antagonists & inhibitors Prosthesis Implantation - methods stenting Stents Treatment Outcome |
| title | Comparison of intracoronary vs. intravenous administration of abciximab in coronary stenting |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-06T00%3A07%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20intracoronary%20vs.%20intravenous%20administration%20of%20abciximab%20in%20coronary%20stenting&rft.jtitle=Catheterization%20and%20cardiovascular%20interventions&rft.au=Kakkar,%20Aman%20K.&rft.date=2004-01&rft.volume=61&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=31&rft.epage=34&rft.pages=31-34&rft.issn=1522-1946&rft.eissn=1522-726X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/ccd.10730&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E80075286%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=80075286&rft_id=info:pmid/14696156&rfr_iscdi=true |