Suppr超能文献

经心肌激光血运重建术作为冠状动脉旁路移植术的辅助治疗:一项为期4年随访的随机多中心研究。

Transmyocardial laser revascularization as an adjunct to coronary artery bypass grafting: a randomized, multicenter study with 4-year follow-up.

作者信息

Frazier O H, Tuzun Egemen, Eichstadt Harald, Boyce Steven W, Lansing Allan M, March Robert J, Sartori Michele, Kadipasaoglu Kamuran A

机构信息

Cardiopulmonary Transplant Service and the Cullen Cardiovascular Research Laboratories of the Texas Heart Institute, Houston, Texas 77030, USA.

出版信息

Tex Heart Inst J. 2004;31(3):231-9.

Abstract

We evaluated transmyocardial laser revascularization (TMLR) with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus CABG alone for severe coronary artery disease involving 21 myocardial region unsuited for CABG. At 4 centers, 44 consecutive patients were randomized for CABG+TMLR (n = 23) or CABG alone (n = 21). Operative and in-hospital mortality and morbidity rates were monitored. Clinical status was evaluated at hospital discharge, 1 year, and 4 years. Success was characterized by relief of angina and freedom from repeat revascularization and death. Preoperatively, 20 patients (47%) were at high risk. The CABG technique, number of grafts, and target vessels were similar in both groups. Patients undergoing CABG+TMLR received 25 +/- 11 laser channels. Their < or = 30-day mortality was 13% (3/23) compared with 28% (6/21) after CABG alone (P = 0.21). There were no significant intergroup differences in the number of intraoperative or in-hospital adverse events. The follow-up period was 50.3 +/- 17.8 months for CABG alone and 48.1 +/- 16.8 months for CABG+TMLR. Both groups had substantially improved angina and functional status at 1 and 4 years, with no significant differences in cumulative 4-year mortality. The incidence of repeat revascularization was 24% after CABG alone versus none after CABG+TMLR (P < 0.05). The 4-year event-free survival rate was 14% versus 39%, respectively (P < 0.064). In conclusion, CABG+TMLR appears safe and poses no additional threat for high-risk patients. Improved overall success and repeat revascularization rates may be due to better perfusion of ischemic areas not amenable to bypass. Further studies are warranted to determine whether these trends are indeed significant.

摘要

我们评估了经心肌激光血运重建术(TMLR)联合冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)与单纯CABG治疗涉及21个不适合CABG的心肌区域的严重冠状动脉疾病的效果。在4个中心,44例连续患者被随机分为CABG + TMLR组(n = 23)或单纯CABG组(n = 21)。监测手术及住院期间的死亡率和发病率。在出院时、1年和4年时评估临床状况。成功的标准为心绞痛缓解、无需再次血运重建且无死亡。术前,20例患者(47%)为高危患者。两组的CABG技术、移植血管数量和靶血管相似。接受CABG + TMLR的患者接受了25±11个激光通道治疗。其≤30天死亡率为13%(3/23),而单纯CABG后为28%(6/21)(P = 0.21)。术中或住院期间不良事件的数量在组间无显著差异。单纯CABG组的随访期为50.3±17.8个月,CABG + TMLR组为48.1±16.8个月。两组在1年和4年时心绞痛和功能状态均有显著改善,4年累积死亡率无显著差异。单纯CABG后再次血运重建的发生率为24%,而CABG + TMLR后无再次血运重建(P < 0.05)。4年无事件生存率分别为14%和39%(P < 0.064)。总之,CABG + TMLR似乎是安全的,对高危患者不构成额外威胁。总体成功率和再次血运重建率的提高可能归因于对不适合旁路移植的缺血区域更好的灌注。有必要进行进一步研究以确定这些趋势是否确实显著。

相似文献

7
Adjunctive transmyocardial revascularization: five-year follow-up of a prospective, randomized trial.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2004 Aug;78(2):458-65; discussion 458-65. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.04.049.
9
Coronary angioplasty versus repeat coronary artery bypass grafting for patients with previous bypass surgery.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996 Nov 1;28(5):1140-6. doi: 10.1016/S0735-1097(96)00286-0.
10
Transmyocardial laser revascularization: is the enthusiasm justified?
Clin Cardiol. 2001 Apr;24(4):321-4. doi: 10.1002/clc.4960240412.

引用本文的文献

1
A Comparative Analysis of Adjunctive Transmyocardial Laser Revascularization With Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.
Cureus. 2025 Mar 21;17(3):e80968. doi: 10.7759/cureus.80968. eCollection 2025 Mar.
3
Son of a Lesser God: The Case of Cell Therapy for Refractory Angina.
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021 Sep 6;8:709795. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.709795. eCollection 2021.
4
Transmyocardial revascularization (TMR): current status and future directions.
Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018 Dec;34(Suppl 3):330-339. doi: 10.1007/s12055-018-0702-7. Epub 2018 Oct 8.
6
Remodeling an infarcted heart: novel hybrid treatment with transmyocardial revascularization and stem cell therapy.
Springerplus. 2016 Jun 16;5(1):738. doi: 10.1186/s40064-016-2355-6. eCollection 2016.
7
Transmyocardial laser revascularization versus medical therapy for refractory angina.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Feb 27;2015(2):CD003712. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003712.pub3.
8
Transmyocardial revascularization devices: technology update.
Med Devices (Auckl). 2014 Dec 18;8:11-9. doi: 10.2147/MDER.S51591. eCollection 2015.

本文引用的文献

1
From controlled trials to clinical practice: monitoring transmyocardial revascularization use and outcomes.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003 Nov 5;42(9):1611-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2003.07.003.
2
Percutaneous myocardial laser revascularization in patients with refractory angina pectoris.
Am J Cardiol. 2003 Mar 15;91(6):661-6. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9149(02)03303-9.
4
Sustained angina relief 5 years after transmyocardial laser revascularization with a CO(2) laser.
Circulation. 2001 Sep 18;104(12 Suppl 1):I81-4. doi: 10.1161/hc37t1.094774.
7
Comparison of transmyocardial revascularization with medical therapy in patients with refractory angina.
N Engl J Med. 1999 Sep 30;341(14):1029-36. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199909303411403.
8
10
Laser channels after percutaneous transmyocardial revascularization.
Circulation. 1999 Apr 27;99(16):2218. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.99.16.2218.

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