Suppr超能文献

随机试验:简单与复杂药物洗脱支架治疗分叉病变的对比——英国分叉冠状动脉研究:老策略、新策略与不断演进的策略

Randomized trial of simple versus complex drug-eluting stenting for bifurcation lesions: the British Bifurcation Coronary Study: old, new, and evolving strategies.

机构信息

Sussex Cardiac Centre, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, BN8 5QH, UK.

出版信息

Circulation. 2010 Mar 16;121(10):1235-43. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.888297. Epub 2010 Mar 1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The optimal strategy for treating coronary bifurcation lesions remains a subject of debate. With bare-metal stents, single-stent approaches appear to be superior to systematic 2-stent strategies. Drug-eluting stents, however, have low rates of restenosis and might offer improved outcomes with complex stenting techniques.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with significant coronary bifurcation lesions were randomized to either a simple or complex stenting strategy with drug-eluting stents. In the simple strategy, the main vessel was stented, followed by optional kissing balloon dilatation/T-stent. In the complex strategy, both vessels were systematically stented (culotte or crush techniques) with mandatory kissing balloon dilatation. Five hundred patients 64+/-10 years old were randomized; 77% were male. Eighty-two percent of lesions were true bifurcations (>50% narrowing in both vessels). In the simple group (n=250), 66 patients (26%) had kissing balloons in addition to main-vessel stenting, and 7 (3%) had T stenting. In the complex group (n=250), 89% of culotte (n=75) and 72% of crush (n=169) cases were completed successfully with final kissing balloon inflations. The primary end point (a composite at 9 months of death, myocardial infarction, and target-vessel failure) occurred in 8.0% of the simple group versus 15.2% of the complex group (hazard ratio 2.02, 95% confidence interval 1.17 to 3.47, P=0.009). Myocardial infarction occurred in 3.6% versus 11.2%, respectively (P=0.001), and in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 2.0% versus 8.0% (P=0.002), respectively. Procedure duration and x-ray dose favored the simple approach.

CONCLUSIONS

When coronary bifurcation lesions are treated, a systematic 2-stent technique results in higher rates of in-hospital and 9-month major adverse cardiovascular events. This difference is largely driven by periprocedural myocardial infarction. Procedure duration is longer, and x-ray dose is higher. The provisional technique should remain the preferred strategy in the majority of cases. Clinical Trial Registration Information- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT 00351260.

摘要

背景

治疗冠状动脉分叉病变的最佳策略仍存在争议。裸金属支架中,单支架方法似乎优于系统的双支架策略。然而,药物洗脱支架的再狭窄率较低,采用复杂的支架技术可能会改善结果。

方法和结果

将有明显冠状动脉分叉病变的患者随机分为药物洗脱支架的简单或复杂支架策略。在简单策略中,主血管被支架植入,随后选择性地进行对吻球囊扩张/T 支架。在复杂策略中,两血管均被系统地支架植入(靴型或挤压技术),强制性地进行对吻球囊扩张。500 例 64+/-10 岁的患者被随机分组;77%为男性。82%的病变为真性分叉病变(两支血管均有>50%狭窄)。在简单组(n=250)中,66 例患者(26%)除主血管支架植入外还使用了对吻球囊,7 例患者(3%)使用了 T 支架。在复杂组(n=250)中,89%的靴型(n=75)和 72%的挤压(n=169)病例均成功完成,并最终进行了对吻球囊扩张。主要终点(9 个月时死亡、心肌梗死和靶血管失败的复合终点)在简单组中的发生率为 8.0%,在复杂组中的发生率为 15.2%(风险比 2.02,95%置信区间 1.17 至 3.47,P=0.009)。心肌梗死的发生率分别为 3.6%和 11.2%(P=0.001),住院期间主要不良心血管事件的发生率分别为 2.0%和 8.0%(P=0.002)。手术时间和 X 射线剂量有利于简单方法。

结论

当治疗冠状动脉分叉病变时,系统的双支架技术会导致更高的住院和 9 个月时主要不良心血管事件发生率。这种差异主要是由围手术期心肌梗死引起的。手术时间较长,X 射线剂量较高。在大多数情况下,临时支架技术应仍然是首选策略。

临床试验注册信息- URL:http://www.clinicaltrials.gov。唯一标识符:NCT 00351260。

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