Suppr超能文献

原发性或补救性经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中的辅助装置:随机试验的荟萃分析。

Adjunctive devices in primary or rescue PCI: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

作者信息

Burzotta Francesco, Testa Luca, Giannico Floriana, Biondi-Zoccai Giuseppe G L, Trani Carlo, Romagnoli Enrico, Mazzari Mario, Mongiardo Rocco, Siviglia Massimo, Niccoli Giampaolo, De Vita Maria, Porto Italo, Schiavoni Giovanni, Crea Filippo

机构信息

Institute of Cardiology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Via Prati Fiscali 158, 00141 Rome, Italy.

出版信息

Int J Cardiol. 2008 Jan 24;123(3):313-21. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2006.12.018. Epub 2007 Mar 26.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To overview and summarize the results emerging from the studies on adjunctive devices (AD) with theoretical anti-embolic properties in patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI).

BACKGROUND

A series of small-to-medium size randomized studies have compared different AD with standard PCI (SP) in the setting of STEMI. The reported results are conflicting.

METHODS

Eighteen prospective randomized studies on 3180 STEMI patients comparing AD with SP were identified and entered the meta-analysis. Pre-specified angiographic, electrocardiographic (absence of ST-segment resolution, STR) and early (up to 30 days) clinical end-points were assessed.

RESULTS

AD were associated with lower rates of angiographically evident distal embolization: OR (95% CI): 0.54 (0.37-0.81). Analyses of angiographic and electrocardiographic reperfusion showed striking heterogeneity among studies and an overall trend toward better results with AD: OR (95% CI) 0.76 (95% CI 0.51-1.12) for TIMI<3, 0.53 (0.37-0.76) for myocardial blush grade (MBG)<3, 0.60 (0.45-0.78) for absence of STR. Subgroup analysis according to the type of AD for the end-point of no STR showed concordant absence of benefit in studies testing distal protection devices, positive results being confined to the studies using thrombectomy devices (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.32-0.66). However, the possibility of a "small study" bias within thrombectomy studies cannot be discharged (significant heterogeneity and positive Egger's test). Early major adverse cardiac events were not different between AD and SP.

CONCLUSIONS

AD use may be associated with reduced rate of angiographic distal embolization, and improved MBG 3 and STR rates. However, efficacy might vary with the type of device employed. Moreover, early clinical outcome is not modified suggesting that further, larger, studies are needed to assess the clinical impact of AD.

CONDENSED ABSTRACT

We conducted a meta-analysis of 18 prospective randomized trials comparing adjunctive devices (AD) with standard PCI in the setting of STEMI. The use of AD was associated with lower rates of (angiographically evident) distal embolization. Analyses of angiographic and electrocardiographic reperfusion showed striking heterogeneity and an overall trend toward better results with AD. Subgroup analysis suggested that different types of device may have different effects. Early major adverse cardiac events were similar between AD and SP.

摘要

目的

综述并总结关于在接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的ST段抬高型急性心肌梗死(STEMI)患者中使用具有理论抗栓特性的辅助装置(AD)的研究结果。

背景

一系列中小型随机研究在STEMI患者中比较了不同的AD与标准PCI(SP)。报道的结果相互矛盾。

方法

确定了18项针对3180例STEMI患者比较AD与SP的前瞻性随机研究并纳入荟萃分析。评估预先设定的血管造影、心电图(ST段未完全回落,STR)和早期(至30天)临床终点。

结果

AD与血管造影显示的远端栓塞发生率较低相关:OR(95%CI):0.54(0.37 - 0.81)。血管造影和心电图再灌注分析显示研究间存在显著异质性,总体趋势是AD组结果更好:TIMI<3级时OR(95%CI)为0.76(95%CI 0.51 - 1.12),心肌灌注分级(MBG)<3级时OR为0.53(0.37 - 0.76),无STR时OR为0.60(0.45 - 0.78)。根据AD类型对无STR终点进行的亚组分析显示,在测试远端保护装置的研究中均未显示出益处,阳性结果仅限于使用血栓切除术装置的研究(OR 0.46,95%CI 0.32 - 0.66)。然而,血栓切除术研究中存在“小型研究”偏倚的可能性无法排除(显著异质性和阳性Egger检验)。AD组和SP组早期主要不良心脏事件无差异。

结论

使用AD可能与血管造影远端栓塞率降低以及MBG 3级和STR率提高相关。然而,疗效可能因所使用装置的类型而异。此外,早期临床结局未改变,这表明需要进一步开展更大规模的研究来评估AD的临床影响。

摘要

我们对18项在STEMI患者中比较辅助装置(AD)与标准PCI的前瞻性随机试验进行了荟萃分析。使用AD与(血管造影显示的)远端栓塞发生率较低相关。血管造影和心电图再灌注分析显示显著异质性,总体趋势是AD组结果更好。亚组分析表明不同类型的装置可能有不同的效果。AD组和SP组早期主要不良心脏事件相似。

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