ObjectiveTo correlate mean platelet volume lymphocyte ratio (MPVLR) and coronary collateral circulation (CCC) in patients with chronic total occlusion (CTO).Materials and methodsA total of 643 patients who were hospitalized at a single large academic medical center from January 2020 to October 2021 and had CTO lesions in at least one major coronary artery confirmed by coronary angiography were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided according to the Rentrop criteria into poorly formed CCC (Rentrop grade 0–1, n = 235) and well-formed CCC (Rentrop grade 2–3, n = 408) groups. Mean platelet volume lymphocyte ratio (MPVLR) was calculated from routine laboratory data (MPV divided by lymphocyte count). The clinical data of the two groups were compared, and relationships between MPVLR and CCC formation were analyzed.ResultsThe MPVLR of patients with poorly formed CCC was significantly higher than that of patients with well-formed CCC (7.82 ± 3.80 vs. 4.84 ± 1.42, P < 0.01). The prevalence of diabetes mellitus and C-reactive protein levels were significantly higher in the poor CCC group than in the good CCC group (P < 0.01), while the proportions of patients with CTO or multivessel lesions in the right coronary artery were significantly lower in the poor CCC group than in the good CCC group (P < 0.01). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified MPVLR (OR: 2.101, 95% CI: 1.840–2.399, P < 0.01), C-reactive protein level (OR: 1.036, 95% CI: 1.008–1.064, P < 0.05), a history of diabetes mellitus (OR: 2.355, 95% CI: 1.532–3.621, P < 0.01), and right coronary CTO ratio (OR: 0.313, 95% CI: 0.202–0.485, P < 0.01) as independent risk factors for CCC formation. The area under the ROC curve of MPVLR for predicting poorly formed CCC was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.784–0.855, P < 0.01), the best cut-off point was 6.02 and the sensitivity and specificity of MPVLR for predicting poorly formed CCC were 72.3 and 82.4%, respectively.ConclusionIn patients with coronary CTO, MPVLR was negatively correlated with CCC and a high MPVLR level was an independent predictor of poorly formed CCC.
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical benefits of rivaroxaban and warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) with high bleeding risk.MethodsA retrospective study was conducted on patients with high bleeding risk NVAF who were hospitalized at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University between May 31, 2016 and May 31, 2019 and took at least rivaroxaban and warfarin. The clinical benefits of both drugs were assessed by efficacy benefit and safety risk. The primary efficacy benefit was a composite end point for stroke (both ischemic and hemorrhagic) and systemic embolism. The secondary efficacy end points were death and myocardial infarction (MI). The principal safety end point was the composite end point of fatal bleeding and critical organ bleeding.ResultsA total of 1,246 patients with high bleeding risk were enrolled, including 787 patients in the rivaroxaban group and 459 patients in the warfarin group. Results of the primary efficacy benefit endpoint were obtained from 104 patients (13.2%) in the rivaroxaban group and 88 (19.2%) patients in the warfarin group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.681; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.512–0.906; P < 0.001 for non-inferiority). The principal safety end points were observed in 49 (6.23%) patients in the rivaroxaban group and in 55 (11.98%) patients in the warfarin group (HR: 0.469 in the rivaroxaban group; 95% CI: 0.314–0.702; P < 0.001). With respect to secondary efficacy and benefit endpoints, 28 (3.56%) patients in the rivaroxaban group and 22 (4.79%) patients in the warfarin group died, with an HR of 0.760 (95% CI: 0.435–1.329; P = 0.336); 32 (4.07%) patients in the rivaroxaban group; and 26 (5.66%) patients in the warfarin group had MI, with an HR of 1.940 (95% CI: 0.495–1.069, P = 0.254) in the rivaroxaban group.ConclusionsRivaroxaban is non-inferior to warfarin in the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with high blood NVAF. Rivaroxaban is superior to warfarin in reducing fatal bleeding and bleeding in critical organs.Clinical Trial RegistrationChinese Clinical Trials Registry, identifier ChiCTR2100052454.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.