Suppr超能文献

比较西罗莫司洗脱支架与紫杉醇洗脱支架治疗糖尿病患者的五项随机临床试验的荟萃分析。

Meta-analysis of five randomized clinical trials comparing sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with diabetes mellitus.

机构信息

Shanghai Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.

出版信息

Am J Cardiol. 2010 Jan 1;105(1):64-8. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.08.652. Epub 2009 Nov 14.

Abstract

Recent data on drug-eluting stents have shown improved clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus. However, the relative efficacy and safety of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) remains controversial. Therefore, a meta-analysis of randomized trials was performed to compare SES with PES exclusively in patients with diabetes. The published research was scanned by formal searches of electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from January 2001 to April 2009. All randomized trials involving head-to-head comparison of SES versus PES in patients with diabetes were examined for analysis. A total of 5 randomized trials were included in the present meta-analysis, involving 1,173 patients (594 in the SES group, 579 in the PES group). SES were significantly more effective in the reduction of target lesion revascularization (5.1% vs 11.4%, odds ratio [OR] 0.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26 to 0.64, p <0.001) and angiographic binary (> or =50%) restenosis (5.6% vs 16.4%, OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.48, p <0.001) compared to PES. In contrast, the differences between SES and PES were not statistically significant with respect to cardiac death (2.2% vs 2.9%, OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.47, p = 0.35), myocardial infarction (1.5% vs 2.6%, OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.31, p = 0.19), and stent thrombosis (0.6% vs 1.2%, OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.84, p = 0.35). In conclusion, SES are superior to PES in reducing the incidences of restenosis and target lesion revascularization in patients with diabetes, with nonsignificant differences in terms of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis.

摘要

最近关于药物洗脱支架的研究数据表明,糖尿病患者的临床结局得到了改善。然而,与紫杉醇洗脱支架(PES)相比,西罗莫司洗脱支架(SES)的相对疗效和安全性仍存在争议。因此,进行了一项荟萃分析,专门比较了糖尿病患者中 SES 与 PES 的疗效。通过对电子数据库(PubMed、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库)进行正式检索,对 2001 年 1 月至 2009 年 4 月发表的研究进行了扫描。对所有涉及 SES 与 PES 头对头比较的随机试验进行了分析。本荟萃分析共纳入 5 项随机试验,共 1173 例患者(SES 组 594 例,PES 组 579 例)。SES 在降低靶病变血运重建(5.1%对 11.4%,比值比 [OR] 0.41,95%置信区间 [CI] 0.26 至 0.64,p<0.001)和血管造影二元性(≥50%)再狭窄(5.6%对 16.4%,OR 0.30,95%CI 0.19 至 0.48,p<0.001)方面明显优于 PES。相反,SES 与 PES 在心脏死亡(2.2%对 2.9%,OR 0.71,95%CI 0.34 至 1.47,p=0.35)、心肌梗死(1.5%对 2.6%,OR 0.58,95%CI 0.26 至 1.31,p=0.19)和支架血栓形成(0.6%对 1.2%,OR 0.57,95%CI 0.18 至 0.84,p=0.35)方面的差异无统计学意义。总之,SES 在降低糖尿病患者再狭窄和靶病变血运重建发生率方面优于 PES,在心脏死亡、心肌梗死和支架血栓形成方面无显著差异。

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