4.4 Article

Rationale for intracoronary administration of abciximab

期刊

JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND THROMBOLYSIS
卷 23, 期 1, 页码 57-63

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11239-006-9000-0

关键词

intracoronary abciximab; acute coronary syndromes; percutaneous coronary intervention

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present review aims to describe the pharmacological aspects as well as the available clinical data supporting the choice of intracoronary route of administration for abciximab, an antiplatelet drug used in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Abciximab is a glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist which determines a potent inhibition of platelet aggregation and thrombus formation. These properties seem to prevent not only thrombus formation but also to promote (at higher drug concentration) lysis of fresh thrombus. Moreover, differently from the other GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors, abciximab also binds to the vitronectin receptor on endothelial, smooth muscle, and inflammatory cells and to an activated conformation of the aMb2 receptor on leukocytes. Such cross-reactivity raises the possibility that clinical benefits derived from its use may not be exclusively due to its anti-thrombotic effect, but may also be related to the suppression of inflammatory pathways involving platelets, white blood cells, and the vascular endothelium. On such basis, the local administration of abciximab at the site of coronary thrombosis may enhance, by increasing its local concentration, the binding to both platelet and endothelium receptors. The results of several angiographic studies assessing the effect of intracoronary abciximab administration support on clinical grounds its adoption in patients with fresh coronary thrombosis. Indeed, better post-angioplasty coronary flow, greater degree of myocardial salvage and a better left ventricular function recovery have been achieved as compared to the intravenous, systemic, administration of drug's bolus.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据