Suppr超能文献

药物洗脱支架引入前后时代冠状动脉支架置入术结果的比较。

Comparison of coronary artery stenting outcomes in the eras before and after the introduction of drug-eluting stents.

作者信息

Hannan Edward L, Racz Michael, Holmes David R, Walford Gary, Sharma Samin, Katz Stanley, Jones Robert H, King Spencer B

机构信息

School of Public Health, State University of New York, University at Albany, One University Place, Rensselaer, NY 12144-3456, USA.

出版信息

Circulation. 2008 Apr 22;117(16):2071-8. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.725531. Epub 2008 Apr 7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Few studies have compared medium-term outcomes for drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare metal stents, and most are relatively small randomized controlled trials. Furthermore, since the introduction of DES, there has been increased use and duration of use of clopidogrel, statins, and other evidence-based therapies. The purpose of the present study was to compare outcomes for patients who underwent stenting in the eras before and after the introduction of DES.

METHODS AND RESULTS

New York state patients undergoing stenting in all nonfederal hospitals in the state were studied. Patients were excluded if they had a previous revascularization. Risk factors that were significant predictors of adverse outcomes were used to adjust adverse outcome rates. The study included 11,436 patients who received stents between October 1, 2002, and March 31, 2003, and 12,926 patients who underwent stenting between October 1, 2003, and March 31, 2004. Death rates, the combined end point of death and myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal MI requiring readmission, target vessel revascularization, and target lesion revascularization were compared at 2 years. Patients in the DES era had significantly better risk-adjusted outcomes for death/MI (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 0.97), 9.9% versus 10.8%; nonfatal MI requiring readmission (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.76 to 0.97); target vessel revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.56 to 0.64), 11.2% versus 17.9%; and target lesion revascularization (hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.51 to 0.59), 8.4% versus 14.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in the DES era experienced lower rates of death/MI, nonfatal MI, target vessel revascularization, and target lesion revascularization, but there were no differences in the rates of death. These improvements are likely a result of increased use of clopidogrel, statins, and dual antiplatelet therapy, in addition to the introduction of DES.

摘要

背景

很少有研究比较药物洗脱支架(DES)和裸金属支架的中期疗效,且大多数是相对较小规模的随机对照试验。此外,自DES引入以来,氯吡格雷、他汀类药物及其他循证疗法的使用量和使用时长均有所增加。本研究的目的是比较DES引入前后两个时期接受支架置入术患者的疗效。

方法与结果

对纽约州所有非联邦医院接受支架置入术的患者进行研究。曾接受过血运重建的患者被排除。使用对不良结局有显著预测作用的危险因素来调整不良结局发生率。该研究纳入了2002年10月1日至2003年3月31日期间接受支架置入术的11436例患者,以及2003年10月1日至2004年3月31日期间接受支架置入术的12926例患者。比较了2年时的死亡率、死亡与心肌梗死(MI)的联合终点、需再次入院的非致死性MI、靶血管血运重建及靶病变血运重建情况。DES时代的患者在死亡/MI的风险调整结局方面显著更好(调整后风险比为0.90;95%置信区间为0.83至0.97),分别为9.9%和10.8%;需再次入院的非致死性MI(调整后风险比为0.86;95%置信区间为0.76至0.97);靶血管血运重建(调整后风险比为0.60;95%置信区间为0.56至0.64),分别为11.2%和17.9%;以及靶病变血运重建(风险比为0.55;95%置信区间为0.51至0.59),分别为8.4%和14.7%。

结论

DES时代的患者死亡/MI、非致死性MI、靶血管血运重建及靶病变血运重建的发生率较低,但死亡率无差异。这些改善可能是由于氯吡格雷、他汀类药物及双联抗血小板治疗的使用增加,以及DES的引入。

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