Suppr超能文献

血运重建对非急性冠状动脉疾病患者死亡率的影响。

The impact of revascularization on mortality in patients with nonacute coronary artery disease.

作者信息

Jeremias Allen, Kaul Sanjay, Rosengart Todd K, Gruberg Luis, Brown David L

机构信息

Department of Medicine (Cardiovascular Medicine), Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, NY, USA.

出版信息

Am J Med. 2009 Feb;122(2):152-61. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2008.07.027.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although early revascularization improves outcomes for patients with acute coronary syndromes, the role of revascularization for patients with nonacute coronary artery disease is controversial. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare surgical or percutaneous revascularization with medical therapy alone to determine the impact of revascularization on death and nonfatal myocardial infarction in patients with coronary artery disease.

METHODS

The Medline and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched to identify randomized trials of coronary revascularization (either surgical or percutaneous) versus medical therapy alone in patients with nonacute coronary disease reporting the individual outcomes of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction reported at a minimum follow-up of 1 year. A random effects model was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) for the 2 prespecified outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies published from 1977 to 2007 were identified for inclusion in the analysis; the revascularization modality was percutaneous coronary intervention in 17 studies, coronary bypass grafting in 6 studies, and either strategy in 5 studies. Follow-up ranged from 1 to 10 years with a median of 3 years. The 28 trials enrolled 13,121 patients, of whom 6476 were randomized to revascularization and 6645 were randomized to medical therapy alone. The OR for revascularization versus medical therapy for mortality was 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.88). A stratified analysis according to revascularization mode revealed both bypass grafting (OR 0.62; 95% CI, 0.50-0.77) and percutaneous intervention (OR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68-0.99) to be superior to medical therapy with respect to mortality. Revascularization was not associated with a significant reduction in nonfatal myocardial infarction compared with medical therapy (OR 0.91; 95% CI, 0.72-1.15).

CONCLUSION

Revascularization by coronary bypass surgery or percutaneous intervention in conjunction with medical therapy in patients with nonacute coronary artery disease is associated with significantly improved survival compared with medical therapy alone.

摘要

背景

尽管早期血运重建可改善急性冠脉综合征患者的预后,但血运重建对于非急性冠状动脉疾病患者的作用仍存在争议。本荟萃分析的目的是比较手术或经皮血运重建与单纯药物治疗,以确定血运重建对冠心病患者死亡和非致命性心肌梗死的影响。

方法

检索Medline和Cochrane对照试验中央注册数据库,以识别非急性冠心病患者接受冠状动脉血运重建(手术或经皮)与单纯药物治疗的随机试验,这些试验报告了至少1年随访期内的死亡或非致命性心肌梗死的个体结局。采用随机效应模型计算两个预先设定结局的比值比(OR)。

结果

确定了1977年至2007年发表的28项研究纳入分析;血运重建方式在17项研究中为经皮冠状动脉介入治疗,6项研究中为冠状动脉旁路移植术,5项研究中为两种策略均可。随访时间为1至10年,中位时间为3年。28项试验共纳入13121例患者,其中6476例随机接受血运重建,6645例随机接受单纯药物治疗。血运重建与药物治疗相比,死亡率的OR为0.74(95%置信区间[CI],0.63 - 0.88)。根据血运重建方式进行的分层分析显示,冠状动脉旁路移植术(OR 0.62;95% CI,0.50 - 0.77)和经皮介入治疗(OR 0.82;95% CI,0.68 - 0.99)在死亡率方面均优于药物治疗。与药物治疗相比,血运重建与非致命性心肌梗死的显著降低无关(OR 0.91;95% CI,0.72 - 1.15)。

结论

对于非急性冠状动脉疾病患者,冠状动脉旁路手术或经皮介入联合药物治疗的血运重建与单纯药物治疗相比,可显著提高生存率。

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