文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
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
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
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 @ 2025

有和无心脏外科旁路移植术医院 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死患者的转归:纽约州经验。

Outcomes for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction in hospitals with and without onsite coronary artery bypass graft surgery: the New York State experience.

机构信息

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

出版信息

Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009 Dec;2(6):519-27. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.109.894048. Epub 2009 Nov 10.


DOI:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.109.894048
PMID:20031769
Abstract

BACKGROUND: The benefit of primary percutaneous coronary interventions (P-PCI) for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been well documented. However, controversy still exists as to whether PCI should be expanded to hospitals without coronary artery bypass graft surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients who were discharged after PCI for STEMI between January 1, 2003, and December 12, 2006, in P-PCI centers (hospitals with no coronary artery bypass graft surgery, and PCI only for patients with STEMI) were propensity matched with patients in full service centers, and mortality and subsequent revascularization rates were compared. For patients undergoing PCI, there were no differences for in-hospital/30-day mortality (2.3% for P-PCI centers versus 1.9% for full service centers [P=0.40]), emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery immediately after PCI (0.06% versus 0.35%, P=0.06), 3-year mortality (7.1% versus 5.9%, P=0.07), or 3-year subsequent revascularization (23.8% versus 21.5%, P=0.52). P-PCI centers had a lower same/next day coronary artery bypass graft rate (0.23% versus 0.69%, P=0.046) and higher repeat target vessel PCI rates (12.1% versus 9.0%, P=0.003). For patients with STEMI who did not undergo PCI, P-PCI centers had higher in-hospital mortality (28.5% versus 22.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.75). CONCLUSIONS: No differences between P-PCI centers and full service centers were found in in-hospital/30-day mortality, the need for emergency surgery, 3-year mortality or subsequent revascularization, but P-PCI centers had higher repeat target vessel PCI rates and higher mortality rates for patients who did not undergo PCI. P-PCI centers should be monitored closely, including the monitoring of patients with STEMI who did not undergo PCI.

摘要

背景:经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(P-PCI)治疗 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者的获益已得到充分证实。然而,对于 PCI 是否应该扩展到没有冠状动脉旁路移植术的医院,仍存在争议。

方法和结果:2003 年 1 月 1 日至 2006 年 12 月 12 日期间,在 P-PCI 中心(无冠状动脉旁路移植术且仅对 STEMI 患者进行 PCI 的医院)接受 PCI 治疗后出院的 STEMI 患者与全面服务中心的患者进行倾向匹配,并比较死亡率和随后的血运重建率。对于接受 PCI 的患者,住院/30 天死亡率无差异(P-PCI 中心为 2.3%,全面服务中心为 1.9%[P=0.40]),PCI 后紧急冠状动脉旁路移植术即刻(0.06%对 0.35%,P=0.06),3 年死亡率(7.1%对 5.9%,P=0.07),或 3 年随后的血运重建(23.8%对 21.5%,P=0.52)。P-PCI 中心的相同/次日冠状动脉旁路移植术率较低(0.23%对 0.69%,P=0.046),重复靶血管 PCI 率较高(12.1%对 9.0%,P=0.003)。对于未接受 PCI 的 STEMI 患者,P-PCI 中心的住院死亡率较高(28.5%对 22.3%;调整后比值比,1.38;95%置信区间,1.10 至 1.75)。

结论:P-PCI 中心与全面服务中心之间在住院/30 天死亡率、紧急手术需求、3 年死亡率或随后的血运重建方面无差异,但 P-PCI 中心重复靶血管 PCI 率较高,且未接受 PCI 的患者死亡率较高。应密切监测 P-PCI 中心,包括对未接受 PCI 的 STEMI 患者的监测。

相似文献

[1]
Outcomes for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction in hospitals with and without onsite coronary artery bypass graft surgery: the New York State experience.

Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009-11-10

[2]
Outcomes among patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction presenting to interventional hospitals with and without on-site cardiac surgery.

Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2009-11

[3]
Coronary artery bypass graft surgery provides better survival in patients with acute coronary syndrome or ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction experiencing cardiogenic shock after percutaneous coronary intervention: a propensity score analysis.

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009-12

[4]
ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction treated at hospitals with and without on-site cardiac surgery: do we have the answer and what about the future?

Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009-12

[5]
Impact of the New York State Cardiac Surgery and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Reporting System on the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.

Am Heart J. 2008-2

[6]
PCI versus CABG for multivessel coronary disease in diabetics.

Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009-1-1

[7]
In-hospital and long-term outcomes of multivessel percutaneous coronary revascularization after acute myocardial infarction.

Am J Cardiol. 2005-2-1

[8]
Public reporting and case selection for percutaneous coronary interventions: an analysis from two large multicenter percutaneous coronary intervention databases.

J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005-6-7

[9]
Arterial access and door-to-balloon times for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients presenting with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction.

Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2010-4-1

[10]
Clinical characteristics and early mortality of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting compared to percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the Australasian Society of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeons (ASCTS) and the Melbourne Interventional Group (MIG) Registries.

Heart Lung Circ. 2009-6

引用本文的文献

[1]
The impact of on-site cardiac surgical backup on clinical outcomes of acute coronary syndrome-analysis of the ACSIS national registry.

Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023-9-1

[2]
Off-site primary percutaneous coronary intervention in a new centre is safe: comparing clinical outcomes with a hospital with surgical backup.

Neth Heart J. 2016-10

[3]
Percutaneous coronary interventions in facilities without cardiac surgery on site.

Curr Cardiol Rep. 2011-10

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

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索