Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Chonnam National University Hospital, Gwangju, Korea.
J Korean Med Sci. 2011 Apr;26(4):521-7. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2011.26.4.521. Epub 2011 Mar 28.
This study compared clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in large coronary arteries in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI). A total of 985 patients who underwent single-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in large coronary arteries (≥ 3.5 mm) in lesions < 25 mm were divided into DES group (n = 841) and BMS group (n = 144). Clinical outcomes during 12 months were compared. In-hospital outcome was similar between the groups. At six months, death/MI rate was not different. However, DES group had significantly lower rates of target-lesion revascularization (TLR) (1.7% vs 5.6%, P = 0.021), target-vessel revascularization (TVR) (2.2% vs 5.6%, P = 0.032), and total major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (3.4% vs 11.9%, P = 0.025). At 12 months, the rates of TLR and TVR remained lower in the DES group (2.5% vs 5.9%, P = 0.032 and 5.9% vs 3.1%, P = 0.041), but the rates of death/MI and total MACE were not statistically different. The use of DES in large vessels in the setting of acute MI is associated with lower need for repeat revascularization compared to BMS without compromising the overall safety over the course of one-year follow-up.
本研究比较了药物洗脱支架(DES)与裸金属支架(BMS)在急性心肌梗死(MI)患者大冠状动脉中的临床疗效。共纳入 985 例在大冠状动脉(≥3.5mm)病变<25mm 行单支血管经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的患者,分为 DES 组(n=841)和 BMS 组(n=144)。比较两组 12 个月的临床转归。两组住院期间的转归相似。两组 6 个月时的死亡率/心肌梗死率(MACE)无差异。然而,DES 组靶病变血运重建(TLR)(1.7% vs. 5.6%,P=0.021)、靶血管血运重建(TVR)(2.2% vs. 5.6%,P=0.032)和全因主要不良心脏事件(MACE)(3.4% vs. 11.9%,P=0.025)发生率明显更低。12 个月时,DES 组 TLR 和 TVR 发生率仍较低(2.5% vs. 5.9%,P=0.032 和 5.9% vs. 3.1%,P=0.041),但死亡率/MACE 发生率无统计学差异。在急性 MI 患者中,与 BMS 相比,DES 在大血管中的应用与再次血运重建的需求较低,且在一年随访期间总体安全性相当。