• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

Bypass surgery versus stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease in patients with unstable angina compared with stable angina.

作者信息

de Feyter P J, Serruys P W, Unger F, Beyar R, de Valk V, Milo S, Simon R, Regensburger D, Crean P A, McGovern E, van den Heuvel P, van Cauwelaert C, Penn I, Tyers G F O, Lindeboom W

机构信息

University Hospital Rotterdam, Dijkzigt, Thoraxcenter, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Circulation. 2002 May 21;105(20):2367-72. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.0000016643.34907.17.

DOI:10.1161/01.cir.0000016643.34907.17
PMID:12021222
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Earlier reports have shown that the outcome of balloon angioplasty or bypass surgery in unstable angina is less favorable than in stable angina. Recent improvements in percutaneous treatment (stent implantation) and bypass surgery (arterial grafts) warrant reevaluation of the relative merits of either technique in treatment of unstable angina. Methods and Results- Seven hundred fifty-five patients with stable angina were randomly assigned to coronary stenting (374) or bypass surgery (381), and 450 patients with unstable angina were randomly assigned to coronary stenting (226) or bypass surgery (224). All patients had multivessel disease considered to be equally treatable by either technique. Freedom from major adverse events, including death, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular events, at 1 year was not different in unstable patients (91.2% versus 88.9%) and stable patients (90.4% versus 92.6%) treated, respectively, with coronary stenting or bypass surgery. Freedom from repeat revascularization at 1 year was similar in unstable and stable angina treated with stenting (79.2% versus 78.9%) or bypass surgery (96.3% versus 96%) but was significantly higher in both unstable and stable patients treated with stenting (16.8% versus 16.9%) compared with bypass surgery (3.6% versus 3.5%). Neither the difference in costs between stented or bypassed stable or unstable angina ($2594 versus $3627) nor the cost-effectiveness was significantly different at 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in rates of death, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular event at 1 year in patients with unstable angina and multivessel disease treated with either stented angioplasty or bypass surgery compared with patients with stable angina. The rate of repeat revascularization of both unstable and stable angina was significantly higher in patients with stents.

摘要

相似文献

1
Bypass surgery versus stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease in patients with unstable angina compared with stable angina.
Circulation. 2002 May 21;105(20):2367-72. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.0000016643.34907.17.
2
Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease.冠状动脉搭桥手术与支架置入术治疗多支血管病变的比较。
N Engl J Med. 2001 Apr 12;344(15):1117-24. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200104123441502.
3
Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI): in-hospital results and 1-year follow-up. ERACI Group.阿根廷多支血管病变患者经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术与冠状动脉搭桥手术对比的随机试验(ERACI):住院结果及1年随访。ERACI研究组
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993 Oct;22(4):1060-7. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(93)90416-x.
4
Coronary stenting for unstable angina: predictors of 30-day and long-term clinical outcome.不稳定型心绞痛的冠状动脉支架置入术:30天及长期临床结局的预测因素
Coron Artery Dis. 1999;10(2):81-8.
5
Long-term follow-up results after plain balloon coronary angioplasty.普通球囊冠状动脉成形术后的长期随访结果。
Indian Heart J. 1999 Jul-Aug;51(4):403-9.
6
One-year outcomes of coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with multiple stenting for multisystem disease: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized clinical trials.冠状动脉旁路移植术与多系统疾病多支架经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的一年结局:来自随机临床试验个体患者数据的荟萃分析
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005 Aug;130(2):512-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2004.12.049.
7
Results of coronary stenting for unstable versus stable angina pectoris.不稳定型心绞痛与稳定型心绞痛冠状动脉支架置入术的结果
Am J Cardiol. 1997 May 15;79(10):1314-8. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9149(97)00131-8.
8
Coronary artery stents in the treatment of ischaemic heart disease: a rapid and systematic review.冠状动脉支架治疗缺血性心脏病:一项快速系统评价
Health Technol Assess. 2000;4(23):1-153.
9
Coronary artery stenting in unstable angina pectoris: a comparison with stable angina pectoris.不稳定型心绞痛的冠状动脉支架置入术:与稳定型心绞痛的比较。
Heart. 1999 Apr;81(4):393-7. doi: 10.1136/hrt.81.4.393.
10
Clinical and economic outcomes of multivessel coronary stenting compared with bypass surgery: a single-center US experience.多支冠状动脉支架置入术与搭桥手术的临床和经济结果比较:美国单中心经验
Am Heart J. 2003 Feb;145(2):334-42. doi: 10.1067/mhj.2003.38.

引用本文的文献

1
Percutaneous coronary intervention coronary artery bypass in treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis study.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗非ST段抬高急性综合征的系统评价和荟萃分析研究
Eur J Transl Myol. 2025 Mar 31;35(1). doi: 10.4081/ejtm.2024.12930. Epub 2024 Nov 28.
2
Comparison of invasive treatment strategies in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.非ST段抬高型急性冠状动脉综合征患者侵入性治疗策略的比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
JTCVS Open. 2021 Sep 8;8:323-335. doi: 10.1016/j.xjon.2021.08.028. eCollection 2021 Dec.
3
A systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention compared to coronary artery bypass grafting in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome.
经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗非 ST 段抬高型急性冠状动脉综合征的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Sci Rep. 2022 Mar 24;12(1):5138. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-09158-0.
4
Coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous revascularization in acute myocardial infarction?急性心肌梗死时冠状动脉搭桥术还是经皮血管重建术?
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2013 Dec;17(6):1015-9. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivt381. Epub 2013 Aug 20.
5
Progressively increasing operative risk among patients referred for coronary artery bypass surgery.因冠状动脉搭桥手术而转诊的患者手术风险逐渐增加。
Ulster Med J. 2006 May;75(2):136-40.
6
Surgical revascularization for acute coronary syndrome: comparative surgical and long-term results.
Jpn J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006 Mar;54(3):95-102. doi: 10.1007/BF02744870.
7
Percutaneous coronary intervention: recommendations for good practice and training.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗:良好实践与培训建议
Heart. 2005 Dec;91 Suppl 6(Suppl 6):vi1-27. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2005.061457.
8
Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting for people with stable angina or acute coronary syndromes.对于稳定型心绞痛或急性冠状动脉综合征患者,经皮冠状动脉腔内血管成形术加支架置入术与冠状动脉旁路移植术的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Jan 25;2005(1):CD004588. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004588.pub3.
9
Revascularisation for acute coronary syndromes: PCI or CABG?急性冠状动脉综合征的血运重建:经皮冠状动脉介入治疗还是冠状动脉旁路移植术?
Heart. 2003 Sep;89(9):967-70. doi: 10.1136/heart.89.9.967.