Suppr超能文献

不稳定型冠状动脉疾病的侵入性治疗与非侵入性治疗比较:FRISC II前瞻性随机多中心研究。冠状动脉疾病不稳定时的法安明与快速血管重建研究组。

Invasive compared with non-invasive treatment in unstable coronary-artery disease: FRISC II prospective randomised multicentre study. FRagmin and Fast Revascularisation during InStability in Coronary artery disease Investigators.

出版信息

Lancet. 1999 Aug 28;354(9180):708-15.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In unstable coronary-artery disease early invasive procedures are common, despite lack of evidence for the superiority of this approach. We compared an early invasive with a non-invasive treatment strategy in unstable coronary-artery disease.

METHODS

In a prospective randomised multicentre study, we randomly assigned 2457 patients in 58 Scandinavian hospitals (median age 66 years, 70% men) an early invasive or non-invasive treatment strategy with placebo-controlled long-term low-molecular-mass heparin (dalteparin) for 3 months. Coronary angiography was done within the first 7 days in 96% and 10%, and revascularisation within the first 10 days in 71% and 9% of patients in the invasive and non-invasive groups, respectively. We followed up patients for 6 months. Analysis was by intention to treat.

FINDINGS

After 6 months there was a decrease in the composite endpoint of death or myocardial infarction of 9.4% in the invasive group, compared with 12.1% in the non-invasive group (risk ratio 0.78 [95% CI 0.62-0.98], p=0.031). There was a significant decrease in myocardial infarction alone (7.8 vs 10.1%, 0.77 [0.60-0.99]; p=0.045) and non-significantly lower mortality (1.9 vs 2.9%, 0.65 [0.39-1.09]; p=0.10). Symptoms of angina and re-admission were halved by the invasive strategy. Results were independent of the randomised dalteparin treatment. The greatest advantages were seen in high-risk patients.

INTERPRETATION

The early invasive approach should be the preferred strategy in most patients with unstable coronary-artery disease who have signs of ischaemia on electrocardiography or raised biochemical markers of myocardial damage.

摘要

背景

在不稳定型冠状动脉疾病中,尽管缺乏证据表明早期侵入性治疗方法更具优势,但该方法仍很常见。我们比较了不稳定型冠状动脉疾病的早期侵入性治疗策略与非侵入性治疗策略。

方法

在一项前瞻性随机多中心研究中,我们将58家斯堪的纳维亚医院的2457例患者(中位年龄66岁,70%为男性)随机分配为早期侵入性或非侵入性治疗策略,并给予安慰剂对照的长期低分子质量肝素(达肝素)治疗3个月。侵入性组和非侵入性组分别有96%和10%的患者在第1周内进行了冠状动脉造影,侵入性组和非侵入性组分别有71%和9%的患者在第10天内进行了血运重建。我们对患者进行了6个月的随访。分析采用意向性治疗。

结果

6个月后,侵入性组死亡或心肌梗死复合终点的发生率下降了9.4%,而非侵入性组为12.1%(风险比0.78[95%可信区间0.62 - 0.98],p = 0.031)。仅心肌梗死发生率有显著下降(7.8%对10.1%,0.77[0.60 - 0.99];p = 0.045),死亡率下降不显著(1.9%对2.9%,0.65[0.39 - 1.09];p = 0.10)。侵入性策略使心绞痛症状和再次入院率减半。结果与随机给予的达肝素治疗无关。在高危患者中优势最为明显。

解读

对于大多数心电图有缺血迹象或心肌损伤生化标志物升高的不稳定型冠状动脉疾病患者,早期侵入性治疗方法应是首选策略。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验