St Louis University School of Medicine, 1034 S Brentwood Blvd., St Louis, MO 63117, USA.
Circulation. 2009 Dec 22;120(25):2529-40. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.913111. Epub 2009 Nov 17.
The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial in 2368 patients with stable ischemic heart disease assigned before randomization to percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting strata reported similar 5-year all-cause mortality rates with insulin sensitization versus insulin provision therapy and with a strategy of prompt initial coronary revascularization and intensive medical therapy or intensive medical therapy alone with revascularization reserved for clinical indication(s). In this report, we examine the predefined secondary end points of cardiac death and myocardial infarction (MI).
Outcome data were analyzed by intention to treat; the Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess 5-year event rates. Nominal P values are presented. During an average 5.3-year follow-up, there were 316 deaths (43% were attributed to cardiac causes) and 279 first MI events. Five-year cardiac mortality did not differ between revascularization plus intensive medical therapy (5.9%) and intensive medical therapy alone groups (5.7%; P=0.38) or between insulin sensitization (5.7%) and insulin provision therapy (6%; P=0.76). In the coronary artery bypass grafting stratum (n=763), MI events were significantly less frequent in revascularization plus intensive medical therapy versus intensive medical therapy alone groups (10.0% versus 17.6%; P=0.003), and the composite end points of all-cause death or MI (21.1% versus 29.2%; P=0.010) and cardiac death or MI (P=0.03) were also less frequent. Reduction in MI (P=0.001) and cardiac death/MI (P=0.002) was significant only in the insulin sensitization group.
In many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and stable ischemic coronary disease in whom angina symptoms are controlled, similar to those enrolled in the percutaneous coronary intervention stratum, intensive medical therapy alone should be the first-line strategy. In patients with more extensive coronary disease, similar to those enrolled in the coronary artery bypass grafting stratum, prompt coronary artery bypass grafting, in the absence of contraindications, intensive medical therapy, and an insulin sensitization strategy appears to be a preferred therapeutic strategy to reduce the incidence of MI.
在 2368 例稳定型缺血性心脏病患者中,BARI 2D 试验在随机分组前被分为经皮冠状动脉介入治疗或冠状动脉旁路移植术亚组,报告称胰岛素增敏与胰岛素供应治疗以及即刻初始冠状动脉血运重建和强化药物治疗或强化药物治疗加血管重建策略用于临床指征(s)的 5 年全因死亡率相似。在本报告中,我们检查了预先设定的次要终点,即心脏死亡和心肌梗死(MI)。
通过意向治疗分析结局数据;采用 Kaplan-Meier 法评估 5 年事件发生率。给出了名义 P 值。在平均 5.3 年的随访期间,有 316 例死亡(43%归因于心脏原因)和 279 例首次 MI 事件。血运重建加强化药物治疗组(5.9%)和强化药物治疗组(5.7%)的 5 年心脏死亡率无差异(P=0.38),胰岛素增敏组(5.7%)和胰岛素供应治疗组(6%)也无差异(P=0.76)。在冠状动脉旁路移植术亚组(n=763)中,血运重建加强化药物治疗组的 MI 事件明显少于强化药物治疗组(10.0%比 17.6%;P=0.003),全因死亡或 MI 的复合终点(21.1%比 29.2%;P=0.010)和心脏死亡或 MI(P=0.03)也较少。MI 减少(P=0.001)和心脏死亡/MI(P=0.002)仅在胰岛素增敏组中具有统计学意义。
在许多患有 2 型糖尿病和稳定型缺血性冠状动脉疾病且心绞痛症状得到控制的患者中,与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗组相似,单独强化药物治疗应是一线治疗策略。对于有更广泛冠状动脉疾病的患者,与冠状动脉旁路移植术组相似,在无禁忌证的情况下,即刻冠状动脉旁路移植术、强化药物治疗和胰岛素增敏策略似乎是降低 MI 发生率的首选治疗策略。