Carver Amanda, Rafelt Suzanne, Gershlick Anthony H, Fairbrother Kathryn L, Hughes Sarah, Wilcox Robert
Queensland Health, Citilink Business Centre, Campbell Street, Herston, Brisbane 4001, Queensland, Australia.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Jul 7;54(2):118-26. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.03.050.
To evaluate the longer-term outcomes for rescue percutaneous coronary intervention (R-PCI).
Thrombolysis remains an important, commonly used reperfusion therapy, yet failure to achieve complete reperfusion occurs relatively frequently. A number of recent trials have focused on the management of patients with thrombolytic failure, including the REACT (Rescue Angioplasty Versus Conservative Treatment or Repeat Thrombolysis) trial, which demonstrated a significant 6-month benefit favoring R-PCI. However, longer-term maintenance of benefit for R-PCI has not been demonstrated.
Rates of the primary composite end point (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events) to 1 year and mortality to a median of 4.4 years in 427 patients included in the 3 randomized arms of the REACT trial (repeat lysis, conservative therapy, and R-PCI) were analyzed.
One-year event-free survival for patients randomized to R-PCI was 81.5%, compared with 64.1% for repeat thrombolysis and 67.5% for conservative therapy (overall p = 0.004). Adjusted hazard ratio was 0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28 to 0.71; p = 0.0008) for R-PCI versus repeat thrombolysis and 0.51 (95% CI: 0.32 to 0.83; p = 0.007) for R-PCI versus conservative therapy. Adjusted hazard ratio for longer-term (median 4.4 years) overall mortality for R-PCI versus repeat thrombolysis was 0.41 (95% CI: 0.22 to 0.75; p = 0.004) and 0.43 (95% CI: 0.23 to 0.79; p = 0.006) for R-PCI versus conservative therapy. There was no difference in either analysis between repeat thrombolysis and conservative strategies.
Rescue PCI, previously shown to be superior in the short term to both repeat thrombolysis and conservative therapy, maintains benefit in terms of long-term mortality. This strategy for failed lysis should be mandated as part of thrombolytic-based ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction protocols.
评估补救性经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(R-PCI)的长期疗效。
溶栓仍然是一种重要且常用的再灌注治疗方法,但相对频繁地出现未能实现完全再灌注的情况。近期的一些试验聚焦于溶栓失败患者的管理,包括REACT(补救性血管成形术与保守治疗或重复溶栓)试验,该试验显示R-PCI在6个月时具有显著获益。然而,R-PCI获益的长期维持情况尚未得到证实。
分析了REACT试验3个随机分组(重复溶栓、保守治疗和R-PCI)中427例患者至1年时的主要复合终点(主要不良心脑血管事件)发生率以及至中位4.4年时的死亡率。
随机接受R-PCI治疗的患者1年无事件生存率为81.5%,重复溶栓组为64.1%,保守治疗组为67.5%(总体p = 0.004)。R-PCI与重复溶栓相比,校正后风险比为0.44(95%置信区间[CI]:0.28至0.71;p = 0.0008);R-PCI与保守治疗相比,校正后风险比为0.51(95%CI:0.32至0.83;p = 0.007)。R-PCI与重复溶栓相比,长期(中位4.4年)总体死亡率的校正后风险比为0.41(95%CI:0.22至0.75;p = 0.004);R-PCI与保守治疗相比,校正后风险比为0.43(95%CI:0.23至0.79;p = 0.006)。重复溶栓和保守治疗策略在上述两种分析中均无差异。
补救性PCI先前已显示在短期优于重复溶栓和保守治疗,在长期死亡率方面仍保持获益。对于溶栓失败的这种策略应作为基于溶栓的ST段抬高型心肌梗死方案的一部分予以规定。