Manchester Heart Centre, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9WL, UK.
Eur Heart J. 2011 Apr;32(8):972-82. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehq398. Epub 2010 Oct 28.
Prompt coronary reperfusion following acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction is pivotal to survival. Primary angioplasty is the gold standard in restoring reperfusion, but thrombolysis needs consideration when optimal call to balloon time is not feasible. Following lysis and with evolving pharmacoinvasive therapies, the advantage of routine, early percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) over standard ischaemia-guided PCI remains debatable. We meta-analysed studies comparing these two interventional strategies.
A MEDLINE search for randomized control studies was performed using the search terms 'coronary, thrombolysis, early or immediate stenting, and acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction'. Further, relevant studies were identified from global cardiovascular scientific sessions/congresses. Two interventional strategies were studied in 3195 patients in eight trials and meta-analysed using a random effects model. The combined endpoint of 30-day mortality, re-infarction, and ischaemia was reached in 106/1487 (7.3%) patients in the routine early PCI group and in 199/1470 (13.5%) patients in the ischaemia-guided PCI group following lysis with odds ratio (OR) 0.47 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.32-0.68, P < 0.0001] favouring routine early PCI, driven by significant reduction in both re-infarction OR 0.62 (95% CI, 0.42-0.90, P < 0.011) and ischaemia OR 0.21 (95% CI, 0.10-0.47, P < 0.001). Thirty-day mortality or major bleeding rates between strategies were not significantly different.
Where primary PCI is not feasible, our meta-analysis favours routine early PCI within 24 h of thrombolysis for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction-a strategy that is safe and a time-target that is easily achievable. Early PCI is associated with reduced recurrence of ischaemia and re-infarction, but at no increased risk of major haemorrhage.
急性 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)后即刻进行冠状动脉再灌注是存活的关键。直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)是恢复再灌注的金标准,但在无法达到最佳球囊时间时,溶栓治疗需要考虑。溶栓后,随着药理学侵袭性治疗的发展,常规早期经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)优于标准缺血指导 PCI 的优势仍存在争议。我们对比较这两种介入策略的研究进行了荟萃分析。
我们使用搜索词“冠状动脉、溶栓、早期或即刻支架置入和急性 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死”在 MEDLINE 上进行了随机对照研究的搜索,并从全球心血管科学会议/大会中确定了相关研究。在八项试验中,对 3195 例患者进行了两种介入策略的研究,并使用随机效应模型进行了荟萃分析。在溶栓后,常规早期 PCI 组 1487 例患者中有 106 例(7.3%)达到 30 天死亡率、再梗死和缺血的联合终点,缺血指导 PCI 组 1470 例患者中有 199 例(13.5%)达到该终点,优势比(OR)为 0.47[95%置信区间(CI),0.32-0.68,P < 0.0001],有利于常规早期 PCI,这主要归因于再梗死 OR(95%CI,0.42-0.90,P < 0.011)和缺血 OR(95%CI,0.21-0.47,P < 0.001)的显著降低。两种策略之间的 30 天死亡率或大出血发生率无显著差异。
在无法进行直接 PCI 的情况下,我们的荟萃分析倾向于在溶栓后 24 小时内常规进行早期 PCI 治疗急性 STEMI-这是一种安全的策略,且时间目标易于实现。早期 PCI 与缺血和再梗死的复发减少相关,但没有增加大出血的风险。