Department of Cardiology, Shenyang Northern Hospital, Shenyang, Liaoning 110016, China.
Chin Med J (Engl). 2010 Apr 5;123(7):789-93.
Data on the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stent (DES) for treatment of multiple coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) lesions are scanty. The aim of the present study was to compare the long-term outcomes of DES versus bare metal stent (BMS) implantation for multiple coronary CTO lesions.
We analyzed 188 patients who underwent coronary stenting for at least two de novo CTO lesions in our center from November 2000 to November 2006. Among them, 118 patients (62.8%) received DES and 70 patients (37.2%) received BMS implantation after the recanalization for CTO lesions. All patients were followed up for up to 5 years for the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Long-term survival rates were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method.
There were no significant differences in baseline clinical characteristics and procedural success rate between DES group and BMS group. Compared with the BMS group, the DES group showed a significantly higher rate of long CTO (> or = 15 mm) (62.0% vs. 50.6%, P = 0.023). The number of stents per lesion (1.39 +/- 0.71 vs. 1.17 +/- 0.66, P = 0.007) and the mean length of stents in the DES group were also higher than those in the BMS group ((40.8 +/- 11.4) mm vs. (23.4 +/- 8.7) mm, P < 0.001). But the mean diameter of stents in the DES group was smaller than that in the BMS group ((3.1 +/- 0.2) mm vs. (3.3 +/- 0.5) mm, P < 0.001). Average follow-up time was 4.8 +/- 0.7 (1.5 - 5.0) years in the BMS group and 4.3 +/- 0.5 (1.3 - 5.0) years in the DES group. Both the 5-year cumulative survival rates and the target vessel revascularization (TVR)-free survival rates of the DES group were significantly higher than those in the BMS group (83.1% vs. 72.9%, Log-rank P = 0.044; 77.1% vs. 62.9%, Log-rank P = 0.009). The cumulative MACE-free survival rates in the DES group were significantly higher than those in the BMS group (71.2% vs. 51.4%, Log-rank P = 0.001). Multivariable Cox regression analysis demonstrated that DES implantation for multiple CTO lesions could significantly reduce the long-term MACE risk after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (HR: 0.436; 95%CI 0.327 - 0.665, P < 0.001). Age over 65 years (HR: 2.018; 95%CI 1.491 - 3.127, P < 0.001) and left ventricular ejection fraction < 50% (HR: 1.494; 95%CI 1.125 - 2.376, P < 0.001) were identified as the independent predictors of long-term MACE.
This study demonstrates the long-term (up to 5 years) efficacy and safety of DES for treatment of multiple coronary CTO lesions, and its superiority compared to BMS in reducing the rates of TVR and MACE.
药物洗脱支架(DES)治疗多支冠状动脉慢性完全闭塞(CTO)病变的疗效和安全性数据较少。本研究旨在比较 DES 与裸金属支架(BMS)治疗多支冠状动脉 CTO 病变的长期结果。
我们分析了 2000 年 11 月至 2006 年 11 月在我们中心接受至少 2 例新发 CTO 病变冠状动脉支架置入的 188 例患者。其中,118 例(62.8%)患者接受 DES 治疗,70 例(37.2%)患者在 CTO 病变再通后接受 BMS 治疗。所有患者均随访 5 年以上,以观察主要不良心脏事件(MACE)的发生情况。采用 Kaplan-Meier 法估计长期生存率。
DES 组和 BMS 组在基线临床特征和手术成功率方面无显著差异。与 BMS 组相比,DES 组长 CTO(>15mm)的发生率更高(62.0% vs. 50.6%,P=0.023)。DES 组每例病变置入支架数(1.39±0.71 枚 vs. 1.17±0.66 枚,P=0.007)和支架总长度((40.8±11.4)mm vs. (23.4±8.7)mm,P<0.001)也高于 BMS 组。但 DES 组支架平均直径小于 BMS 组((3.1±0.2)mm vs. (3.3±0.5)mm,P<0.001)。BMS 组平均随访时间为 4.8±0.7(1.5-5.0)年,DES 组为 4.3±0.5(1.3-5.0)年。DES 组 5 年累积生存率和靶血管血运重建(TVR)无事件生存率均明显高于 BMS 组(83.1% vs. 72.9%,Log-rank P=0.044;77.1% vs. 62.9%,Log-rank P=0.009)。DES 组累积 MACE 无事件生存率明显高于 BMS 组(71.2% vs. 51.4%,Log-rank P=0.001)。多变量 Cox 回归分析表明,DES 置入治疗多支 CTO 病变可显著降低经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后的长期 MACE 风险(HR:0.436;95%CI:0.327-0.665,P<0.001)。年龄>65 岁(HR:2.018;95%CI:1.491-3.127,P<0.001)和左心室射血分数<50%(HR:1.494;95%CI:1.125-2.376,P<0.001)是长期 MACE 的独立预测因素。
本研究表明,DES 治疗多支冠状动脉 CTO 病变具有长期(长达 5 年)疗效和安全性,与 BMS 相比,DES 降低 TVR 和 MACE 发生率的优势更为显著。