Suppr超能文献

与裸金属支架相比,接受药物洗脱支架的医疗保险患者的生存优势:是真实的还是人为的?

Survival advantage in Medicare patients receiving drug-eluting stents compared with bare metal stents: real or artefactual?

作者信息

Wang Fen Wei, Uretsky Barry F, Freeman Jean L, Zhang Dong, Giordano Sharon H, Goodwin James S

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas, USA.

出版信息

Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2008 Apr 1;71(5):636-43. doi: 10.1002/ccd.21417.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Concerns have been raised regarding late mortality, particularly from late stent thrombosis, from drug-eluting stents (DES). Randomized clinical trials have shown that DES decrease restenosis but do not decrease mortality compared with bare metal stents (BMS). These studies utilized well-defined clinical and angiographic subsets. In the "real world" drug-eluting stents are used in a much broader crosssection of patients. We evaluated mortality in the first year after implantation of DES, specifically the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES), Cypher vs. BMS in "real world" older patients using the Medicare claims database.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data for the years 2002 (n = 6,890; pre-DES) and 2003 (n = 7,566; first year of DES use) (May through December of each year) were analyzed. BMS and DES groups had similar baseline characteristics except for small but significant differences with BMS patients being somewhat older, having more males and African Americans, and a higher percentage of peripheral artery disease and heart failure while DES patients had a higher percentage of diabetics and patients with prior revascularization procedures. A significant improvement in mortality using both unadjusted and adjusted analyses was observed for DES (6.0% vs. 11.4%, P < 0.0001; hazard ratio 1.98, 95% CI 1.68-2.34). Controlling for comorbidity, extent of disease, and other characteristics by multivariable analysis or by propensity analysis had little impact on these results. On the other hand, there was no change in overall mortality in all stented patients in 2003 compared with all stented patients in 2002.

CONCLUSION

An observed mortality benefit for DES compared with BMS in 2003 was observed, demonstrating the safety of DES, and suggesting the possibility of superiority in outcome in older patients with DES vs. BMS. However, the lack of improved survival from 2002 to 2003 in all stented patients suggests that the mortality advantage with DES finding may be due to unidentified selection biases. Our data suggest that DES in the Medicare population is as safe as, and possibly superior, to BMS for survival over the first year after implantation.

摘要

背景

对于药物洗脱支架(DES)的晚期死亡率,尤其是晚期支架血栓形成导致的死亡率,人们已提出担忧。随机临床试验表明,与裸金属支架(BMS)相比,DES可降低再狭窄率,但不能降低死亡率。这些研究采用了明确界定的临床和血管造影亚组。在“现实世界”中,药物洗脱支架应用于更广泛的患者群体。我们使用医疗保险理赔数据库,评估了“现实世界”中老年患者植入DES(特别是西罗莫司洗脱支架[SES],Cypher)与BMS后第一年的死亡率。

方法与结果

分析了2002年(n = 6890;DES应用前)和2003年(n = 7566;DES使用的第一年)(每年5月至12月)的数据。BMS组和DES组具有相似的基线特征,但存在一些小的显著差异,BMS患者年龄稍大,男性和非裔美国人较多,外周动脉疾病和心力衰竭的比例较高,而DES患者糖尿病患者和既往接受血管重建手术的患者比例较高。使用未调整和调整分析均观察到DES的死亡率有显著改善(6.0%对11.4%,P < 0.0001;风险比1.98,95%可信区间1.68 - 2.34)。通过多变量分析或倾向分析控制合并症、疾病程度和其他特征对这些结果影响不大。另一方面,2003年所有置入支架患者的总体死亡率与2002年相比没有变化。

结论

观察到2003年DES与BMS相比有死亡率获益,证明了DES的安全性,并提示DES在老年患者中可能比BMS有更好的结局。然而,2002年至2003年所有置入支架患者的生存率没有提高,这表明DES死亡率优势的发现可能是由于未识别的选择偏倚。我们的数据表明,医疗保险人群中DES在植入后第一年的生存安全性与BMS相当,甚至可能更优。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3885/4006950/cdb1aaf8853a/nihms574656f1.jpg

相似文献

6

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验