• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

用于无保护左主干冠状动脉疾病的紫杉醇洗脱支架与西罗莫司洗脱支架的比较

Paclitaxel- versus sirolimus-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease.

作者信息

Mehilli Julinda, Kastrati Adnan, Byrne Robert A, Bruskina Olga, Iijima Raisuke, Schulz Stefanie, Pache Jürgen, Seyfarth Melchior, Massberg Steffen, Laugwitz Karl-Ludwig, Dirschinger Josef, Schömig Albert

机构信息

Deutsches Herzzentrum, Technische Universität, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 May 12;53(19):1760-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.01.035.

DOI:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.01.035
PMID:19422982
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this trial was to compare the safety and efficacy of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) for treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery (uLMCA) disease.

BACKGROUND

Both PES and SES have reduced the risk of restenosis, particularly in high-risk patient and lesion subsets. However, their comparative performance in uLMCA lesions is not known.

METHODS

In this randomized study, 607 patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for uLMCA were enrolled: 302 were assigned to receive a PES (Taxus, Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) and 305 assigned to receive a SES (Cypher, Cordis, Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, New Jersey). The primary end point was the combined incidence of death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 1 year. The secondary end point was angiographic restenosis on the basis of the LMCA area analysis at follow-up angiography.

RESULTS

At 1 year the cumulative incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or TLR was 13.6% in the PES and 15.8% in the SES group (relative risk [RR]: 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56 to 1.29, p = 0.44). One patient in the PES group (0.3%) and 2 patients in the SES group (0.7%) experienced definite stent thrombosis (p = 0.57). Mortality at 2 years was 10.7% in the PES and 8.7% in the SES group (RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.66 to 1.95, p = 0.64). Angiographic restenosis was 16.0% with PES and 19.4% with SES (RR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.57 to 1.19, p = 0.30).

CONCLUSIONS

Implantation of either PES or SES in uLMCA lesions is safe and effective; both of these drug-eluting stents provide comparable clinical and angiographic outcomes. (Drug-Eluting-Stents for Unprotected Left Main Stem Disease [ISAR-LEFT-MAIN]; NCT00133237).

摘要

目的

本试验旨在比较紫杉醇洗脱支架(PES)和西罗莫司洗脱支架(SES)治疗无保护左主干冠状动脉(uLMCA)疾病的安全性和有效性。

背景

PES和SES均降低了再狭窄风险,尤其是在高危患者和病变亚组中。然而,它们在uLMCA病变中的对比表现尚不清楚。

方法

在这项随机研究中,纳入了607例因uLMCA接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的有症状冠状动脉疾病患者:302例被分配接受PES(Taxus,波士顿科学公司,马萨诸塞州纳蒂克),305例被分配接受SES(Cypher,科迪斯公司,强生公司,新泽西州新不伦瑞克)。主要终点是1年时死亡、心肌梗死和靶病变血运重建(TLR)的联合发生率。次要终点是基于随访血管造影时LMCA面积分析的血管造影再狭窄。

结果

1年时,PES组死亡、心肌梗死或TLR的累积发生率为13.6%,SES组为15.8%(相对风险[RR]:0.85,95%置信区间[CI]:0.56至1.29,p = 0.44)。PES组1例患者(0.3%)和SES组2例患者(0.7%)发生明确的支架血栓形成(p = 0.57)。2年时,PES组死亡率为10.7%,SES组为8.7%(RR:1.14,95%CI:0.66至1.95,p = 0.64)。PES组血管造影再狭窄率为16.0%,SES组为19.4%(RR:0.82,95%CI:0.57至1.19,p = 0.30)。

结论

在uLMCA病变中植入PES或SES均安全有效;这两种药物洗脱支架提供了相当的临床和血管造影结果。(无保护左主干疾病的药物洗脱支架[ISAR-LEFT-MAIN];NCT00133237)

相似文献

1
Paclitaxel- versus sirolimus-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease.用于无保护左主干冠状动脉疾病的紫杉醇洗脱支架与西罗莫司洗脱支架的比较
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 May 12;53(19):1760-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.01.035.
2
Long-term clinical outcomes of sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stents for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease: analysis of the MAIN-COMPARE (revascularization for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: comparison of percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus surgical revascularization) registry.西罗莫司洗脱支架与紫杉醇洗脱支架治疗无保护左主干冠状动脉疾病患者的长期临床结局:MAIN-COMPARE(无保护左主干冠状动脉狭窄血运重建:经皮冠状动脉腔内血管成形术与外科血运重建比较)注册研究分析
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Aug 25;54(9):853-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.04.071.
3
Comparison of the efficacy and safety of zotarolimus-, sirolimus-, and paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction.佐他莫司、西罗莫司和紫杉醇洗脱支架在ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者中的疗效和安全性比较。
Am J Cardiol. 2009 Nov 15;104(10):1370-6. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.06.059. Epub 2009 Sep 26.
4
Clinical efficacy of drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients: a meta-analysis.药物洗脱支架在糖尿病患者中的临床疗效:一项荟萃分析。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008 Jun 24;51(25):2385-95. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.03.028.
5
Outcome in the real-world of coronary high-risk intervention with drug-eluting stents (ORCHID) -- a single-center study comparing Cypher sirolimus-eluting with Taxus paclitaxel-eluting stents.药物洗脱支架用于冠状动脉高危干预的真实世界结果(ORCHID)——一项比较西罗莫司洗脱Cypher支架与紫杉醇洗脱Taxus支架的单中心研究
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006 Nov;68(5):663-8. doi: 10.1002/ccd.20741.
6
Randomized comparison of everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents: two-year clinical follow-up from the Clinical Evaluation of the Xience V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients with de novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions (SPIRIT) III trial.依维莫司洗脱支架与紫杉醇洗脱支架的随机对照比较:来自Xience V依维莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架系统治疗初发原发性冠状动脉病变患者的临床评估(SPIRIT)III试验的两年临床随访
Circulation. 2009 Feb 10;119(5):680-6. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.803528. Epub 2009 Jan 26.
7
Comparison of three-year clinical outcome of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents versus bare metal stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (from the RESEARCH and T-SEARCH Registries).西罗莫司洗脱支架和紫杉醇洗脱支架与裸金属支架治疗ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者的三年临床结局比较(来自RESEARCH和T-SEARCH注册研究)
Am J Cardiol. 2007 Apr 15;99(8):1027-32. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.11.070. Epub 2007 Mar 6.
8
A meta-analysis of 16 randomized trials of sirolimus-eluting stents versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease.一项针对冠心病患者中雷帕霉素洗脱支架与紫杉醇洗脱支架的16项随机试验的荟萃分析。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007 Oct 2;50(14):1373-80. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.06.047. Epub 2007 Aug 21.
9
Differences in restenosis rate with different drug-eluting stents in patients with and without diabetes mellitus: a report from the SCAAR (Swedish Angiography and Angioplasty Registry).糖尿病患者与非糖尿病患者使用不同药物洗脱支架时再狭窄率的差异:来自瑞典血管造影和血管成形术登记处(SCAAR)的报告
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 May 5;53(18):1660-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.01.054.
10
2-year clinical outcomes after implantation of sirolimus-eluting, paclitaxel-eluting, and bare-metal coronary stents: results from the WDHR (Western Denmark Heart Registry).西罗莫司洗脱、紫杉醇洗脱和裸金属冠状动脉支架植入术后的2年临床结局:来自WDHR(丹麦西部心脏登记处)的结果。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Feb 24;53(8):658-64. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.09.058.

引用本文的文献

1
Mechanistic insights into the anti-restenotic effects of HSP27 and HO1 modulated by reconstituted HDL on neointimal hyperplasia.热休克蛋白 27 和血红素加氧酶 1 介导的重组高密度脂蛋白抗再狭窄作用的机制研究:对内膜增生的影响。
Sci Rep. 2023 Dec 12;13(1):22078. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-49367-9.
2
Overcoming Technical Complexities in Late Coronary Stent Thrombosis: A Clinical Report.克服晚期冠状动脉支架内血栓形成的技术复杂性:一份临床报告。
Cureus. 2023 Oct 22;15(10):e47448. doi: 10.7759/cureus.47448. eCollection 2023 Oct.
3
Bioabsorbable polymer drug-eluting stents with 4-month dual antiplatelet therapy versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents with 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with left main coronary artery disease: the IDEAL-LM randomised trial.
左主干冠状动脉疾病患者中使用 4 个月双联抗血小板治疗的可生物吸收聚合物药物洗脱支架与使用 12 个月双联抗血小板治疗的耐用聚合物药物洗脱支架的比较:IDEAL-LM 随机试验。
EuroIntervention. 2022 Apr 22;17(18):1467-1476. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00514.
4
Risk factors for revascularization and in-stent restenosis in patients with triple-vessel disease after second-generation drug-eluting stent implantation: a retrospective analysis.二代药物洗脱支架置入术后三血管病变患者血运重建和支架内再狭窄的危险因素:回顾性分析。
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2021 Sep 17;21(1):446. doi: 10.1186/s12872-021-02259-0.
5
The EXCEL Trial: The Interventionalists' Perspective.EXCEL试验:介入医生的观点。
Eur Cardiol. 2021 Mar 2;16:e01. doi: 10.15420/ecr.2020.32. eCollection 2021 Feb.
6
Evaluation of Left Main Coronary Artery Using Optical Frequency Domain Imaging and Its Pitfalls.应用光频域成像技术评估左主干冠状动脉及其潜在问题。
J Interv Cardiol. 2020 Jun 12;2020:4817239. doi: 10.1155/2020/4817239. eCollection 2020.
7
Correlation of pre-operative circulating inflammatory cytokines with restenosis and rapid angiographic stenotic progression risk in coronary artery disease patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents.术前循环炎症细胞因子与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗药物洗脱支架置入术后冠心病患者再狭窄及快速血管造影狭窄进展风险的相关性。
J Clin Lab Anal. 2020 Mar;34(3):e23108. doi: 10.1002/jcla.23108. Epub 2019 Nov 14.
8
Prognosis of Percutaneous Intervention of a Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis Without the Use of Intravascular Imaging.不使用血管内成像技术对左主干冠状动脉狭窄进行经皮介入治疗的预后
Cureus. 2018 Jun 22;10(6):e2857. doi: 10.7759/cureus.2857.
9
Revascularisation of left main stem disease: a prospective analysis of modern practice and outcomes in a non-surgical centre.左主干病变血运重建:非外科中心现代实践与结果的前瞻性分析。
Open Heart. 2018 Jul 11;5(2):e000804. doi: 10.1136/openhrt-2018-000804. eCollection 2018.
10
Left Main Stem Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - Data and Ongoing Trials.左主干经皮冠状动脉介入治疗——数据与正在进行的试验
Interv Cardiol. 2015 Sep;10(3):132-135. doi: 10.15420/ICR.2015.10.03.132.