Abbott J Dawn, Voss Matthew R, Nakamura Mamoo, Cohen Howard A, Selzer Faith, Kip Kevin E, Vlachos Helen A, Wilensky Robert L, Williams David O
Department of Cardiology, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007 Nov 20;50(21):2029-36. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.07.071.
We investigated the effectiveness and safety of drug-eluting stents (DES) as used in routine clinical practice.
Randomized trials have shown that DES prevent target vessel revascularization in selected patients, but whether this translates into superior outcomes, compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), for the full spectrum of patients treated with DES in North America is unknown.
Patients in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry enrolled in 2004 who received at least 1 DES (n = 1,460) were compared with 1,763 patients enrolled in the recruitment period immediately preceding the approval of DES (2001 to 2002) who received at least 1 BMS.
Patients receiving DES more often had diabetes mellitus and less often presented with an acute myocardial infarction (MI). At 1 year, cumulative death and MI was 7.6% in DES- and 8.7% in BMS-treated patients (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 to 1.15; p = 0.34). The 1-year rate of target vessel revascularization was 5.0% in DES and 9.2% in BMS patients (p < 0.001), and the risk of any repeat revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary bypass was lower in DES patients (adjusted HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.60; p < 0.001). Patients with both simple and complex lesion characteristics benefited from DES with lower risk of repeat target vessel revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention compared with BMS (any complex lesion: adjusted HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.83; absence of any complex lesion: adjusted HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.71). The 1-year incidence of stent thrombosis was 1.0% in DES patients.
The generalized use of DES resulted in better outcomes than BMS, with fewer clinically driven revascularization procedures and similar rates of death and MI at 1 year.
我们研究了药物洗脱支架(DES)在常规临床实践中的有效性和安全性。
随机试验表明,DES可预防特定患者的靶血管再血管化,但在北美接受DES治疗的所有患者中,与裸金属支架(BMS)相比,这是否能转化为更好的结果尚不清楚。
将2004年纳入美国国立心肺血液研究所动态注册研究且接受至少1枚DES的患者(n = 1460)与在DES获批前(2001年至2002年)招募期内接受至少1枚BMS的1763例患者进行比较。
接受DES的患者糖尿病患病率更高,急性心肌梗死(MI)发生率更低。1年时,DES治疗组患者累积死亡和MI发生率为7.6%,BMS治疗组为8.7%(校正风险比[HR]0.88,95%置信区间[CI]0.68至1.15;p = 0.34)。DES组患者1年靶血管再血管化率为5.0%,BMS组为9.2%(p < 0.001),DES组患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗或冠状动脉搭桥术进行任何再次血管重建的风险更低(校正HR 0.38,95%CI 0.25至0.60;p < 0.001)。与BMS相比,具有简单和复杂病变特征的患者均从DES中获益,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗再次靶血管再血管化风险更低(任何复杂病变:校正HR 0.57,95%CI 0.39至0.83;无任何复杂病变:校正HR 0.44,95%CI 0.28至0.71)。DES组患者1年支架血栓形成发生率为1.0%。
DES的广泛应用比BMS产生了更好的结果,临床驱动的再血管化手术更少,1年时死亡和MI发生率相似。