Hachamovitch Rory, Rozanski Alan, Hayes Sean W, Thomson Louise E J, Germano Guido, Friedman John D, Cohen Ishac, Berman Daniel S
Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif, USA.
J Nucl Cardiol. 2006 Nov;13(6):768-78. doi: 10.1016/j.nuclcard.2006.08.017.
We hypothesized that ejection fraction (EF) best predicts cardiovascular death but only measures of ischemia predict relative survival benefit from revascularization compared with medical therapy.
We followed up 5366 consecutive patients without prior revascularization who underwent stress electrocardiography-gated myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (MPS) for 2.8 +/- 1.2 years, during which 146 cardiac deaths occurred (2.7%, 1.0%/y). The treatment received within 60 days after MPS was used to define the subgroups (revascularization in 402 patients, with cardiac death occurring in 6.2%, vs medical therapy in 4964 patients, with cardiac death occurring in 2.4%; P < .0001, chi2 = 18.7). Adjustment for nonrandomized treatment assignment used a propensity score based on logistic regression modeling of referral to revascularization. The percent of myocardium that was ischemic was the most important predictor of revascularization. The overall model (multivariate chi2 = 728, c index = 0.89, P < 10(-5)) was used as a propensity score. Cox proportional hazards analysis, assessing the relationship between MPS results, non-MPS covariates, and cardiac death, revealed that EF was superior to percent ischemic myocardium in the prediction of cardiac death after adjustment for pre-MPS data and the propensity score. However, an interaction between percent ischemic myocardium and revascularization was present such that, irrespective of EF, patients with little or no ischemia had an improved survival rate with medical therapy, whereas with increasing ischemia, progressive improvements in survival rate were noted with revascularization.
Although EF predicts cardiac death, only inducible ischemia identifies which patients have a short-term benefit from revascularization.
我们假设射血分数(EF)最能预测心血管死亡,但只有缺血指标才能预测与药物治疗相比,血运重建带来的相对生存获益。
我们对5366例既往未接受血运重建的连续患者进行了随访,这些患者接受了运动心电图门控心肌灌注单光子发射计算机断层扫描(MPS),随访时间为2.8±1.2年,在此期间发生了146例心源性死亡(2.7%,1.0%/年)。MPS后60天内接受的治疗用于定义亚组(402例患者接受血运重建,心源性死亡发生率为6.2%;4964例患者接受药物治疗,心源性死亡发生率为2.4%;P<0.0001,χ²=18.7)。对非随机治疗分配的调整采用基于转诊至血运重建的逻辑回归模型的倾向评分。缺血心肌的百分比是血运重建最重要的预测指标。整体模型(多变量χ²=728,c指数=0.89,P<10⁻⁵)用作倾向评分。Cox比例风险分析评估了MPS结果、非MPS协变量与心源性死亡之间的关系,结果显示,在对MPS前数据和倾向评分进行调整后,EF在预测心源性死亡方面优于缺血心肌百分比。然而,缺血心肌百分比与血运重建之间存在相互作用,即无论EF如何,缺血很少或无缺血的患者接受药物治疗时生存率提高,而随着缺血增加,血运重建时生存率逐渐提高。
虽然EF可预测心源性死亡,但只有诱发性缺血才能确定哪些患者能从血运重建中获得短期获益。