Abstract
Objective To compare the effect and the adverse reaction of reteplase and urokinase which were used in the treatment of uremic patients with arteriovenous fistula thrombosis. Methods A total of 23 uremic patients with arteriovenous fistula thrombosis who were treated with either reteplase or urokinase were divide into two groups in our hospital from January 2015 to January 2016. There were 12 patients in reteplase group and 11 patients in urokinase group. The clinical data of these patients were analyzed retrospectively and the success rate and the adverse events rate, such as blooding, were compared. Results The thrombolytic treatment were 10 (83.3%) cases successful in the 12 cases of reteplase group, and were 4 (36.4%) cases successful in the 11 cases of urokinase group. In reteplase group whose fistula thrombosis were no more than 24 hours, the successful rate of thrombolysis was 100%. Conclusion Both reteplase and urokinase are effective and safe in the treatment of arteriovenous fistula thrombosis, but reteplase is superior to urokinase. In addition, reteplase takes effect faster than urokinase. It is worthy for clinical promotion. Key words: Reteplase; Urokinase; Internal-fistula thrombosis; Thrombolysis
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
