Suppr超能文献

在因血管成形术前来就诊的患者中,支架置入术与非体外循环冠状动脉搭桥手术的随机对照比较。

Randomized comparison between stenting and off-pump bypass surgery in patients referred for angioplasty.

作者信息

Eefting Frank, Nathoe Hendrik, van Dijk Diederik, Jansen Erik, Lahpor Jaap, Stella Pieter, Suyker Willem, Diephuis Jan, Suryapranata Harry, Ernst Sjef, Borst Cornelius, Buskens Erik, Grobbee Diederick, de Jaegere Peter

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Heart Lung Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Circulation. 2003 Dec 9;108(23):2870-6. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000100723.50363.2C. Epub 2003 Dec 1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Stenting improves cardiac outcome in comparison with balloon angioplasty. Compared with conventional surgery, off-pump bypass surgery on the beating heart without cardiopulmonary bypass may reduce morbidity, hospital stay, and costs. The purpose, therefore, was to compare cardiac outcome, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness 1 year after stenting and after off-pump surgery.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients referred for angioplasty (n=280) were randomly assigned to stenting (n=138) or off-pump bypass surgery. At 1 year, survival free from stroke, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization was 85.5% after stenting and 91.5% after off-pump surgery (relative risk, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.02). Freedom from angina was 78.3% after stenting and 87.0% after off-pump surgery (P=0.06). Quality-adjusted lifetime was 0.82 year after stenting and 0.79 year after off-pump surgery (P=0.09). Hospital stay after the initial procedure was 1.43 and 5.77 days, respectively (P<0.01). Stenting reduced overall costs by 2933 dollars (26.2%) per patient (8276 dollars versus 11 209 dollars; P<0.01). Stenting was more cost-effective in 95% of the bootstrap estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

At 1 year, stenting was more cost-effective than off-pump surgery while maintaining comparable cardiac outcome and quality of life. Stenting rather than off-pump surgery, therefore, can be recommended as a first-choice revascularization strategy in selected patients.

摘要

背景

与球囊血管成形术相比,支架置入术可改善心脏预后。与传统手术相比,非体外循环下心脏不停跳搭桥手术可能会降低发病率、缩短住院时间并降低成本。因此,本研究旨在比较支架置入术和非体外循环手术后1年的心脏预后、生活质量和成本效益。

方法与结果

因血管成形术前来就诊的患者(n = 280)被随机分为支架置入组(n = 138)或非体外循环搭桥手术组。1年后,支架置入术后无卒中、心肌梗死和再次血运重建的生存率为85.5%,非体外循环手术后为91.5%(相对风险,0.93;95%可信区间,0.86至1.02)。支架置入术后无心绞痛的比例为78.3%,非体外循环手术后为87.0%(P = 0.06)。支架置入术后质量调整生命年为0.82年,非体外循环手术后为0.79年(P = 0.09)。初次手术后的住院时间分别为1.43天和5.77天(P<0.01)。支架置入术使每位患者的总体成本降低了2933美元(26.2%)(8276美元对11209美元;P<0.01)。在95%的自抽样估计中,支架置入术更具成本效益。

结论

1年后,支架置入术在维持相当的心脏预后和生活质量的同时,比非体外循环手术更具成本效益。因此,对于部分患者,推荐支架置入术而非非体外循环手术作为首选的血运重建策略。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验