Suppr超能文献

紫杉醇涂层球囊与非涂层球囊血管成形术降低股腘动脉疾病患者的靶病变血运重建:随机试验的荟萃分析。

Paclitaxel-coated versus uncoated balloon angioplasty reduces target lesion revascularization in patients with femoropopliteal arterial disease: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

机构信息

Deutsches Herzzentrum, Technische Universität, Lazarettstrasse 36, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2012 Aug 1;5(4):582-9. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.112.969972. Epub 2012 Jul 31.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In disease of the femoropopliteal artery, paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) therapy improved angiographic outcomes as compared with uncoated balloon (UCB) angioplasty. Nevertheless, it remains uncertain whether PCB may reduce the need for reintervention.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), scientific session abstracts, and relevant web sites for trials of PCB versus UCB angioplasty. Key words were: "superficial femoral artery," "popliteal artery," "angioplasty," "drug-eluting balloon," "paclitaxel-eluting balloon," and "randomized trial." Inclusion criteria were: (1) randomized design; (2) intention-to-treat analysis; and (3) ≥6-month follow-up. Exclusion criteria were: (1) vessel treated other than femoropopliteal artery; (2) device used other than PCB/UCB; and (3) irretrievable or duplicated data. No restrictions (language, publication date, or status) were applied. The primary end point was target lesion revascularization. Secondary end points were: angiographic binary restenosis and late lumen loss and all-cause mortality. A total of 381 patients enrolled in 4 randomized trials were included (PCB, n=186 versus UCB, n=195). Median follow-up was 10.3 months. Angioplasty with PCB versus UCB reduces target lesion revascularization (12.2% versus 27.7%; OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.13-0.38; P<0.00001), angiographic restenosis (18.7% versus 45.5%; OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.14-0.48; P<0.0001), and late lumen loss (range, -0.05 to 0.50 mm versus 0.61-1.7 mm; weighted mean difference, -0.75 mm; 95% CI, -1.06 to -0.45; P<0.00001). No mortality difference was observed for PCB versus UCB (2.1% versus 3.2%; OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.39-2.49; P=0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

In femoropopliteal arterial disease, PCB therapy is associated with superior antirestenotic efficacy as compared with UCB angioplasty with no evidence of a differential safety profile.

摘要

背景

在股腘动脉疾病中,与未涂层球囊(UCB)血管成形术相比,紫杉醇涂层球囊(PCB)治疗改善了血管造影结果。然而,PCB 是否能降低再介入治疗的需求仍不确定。

方法和结果

我们在 Medline、EMBASE、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、科学会议摘要和相关网站上搜索了 PCB 与 UCB 血管成形术的试验。关键词为:“股浅动脉”、“腘动脉”、“血管成形术”、“药物洗脱球囊”、“紫杉醇洗脱球囊”和“随机试验”。纳入标准为:(1)随机设计;(2)意向治疗分析;(3)随访时间≥6 个月。排除标准为:(1)治疗的血管除股腘动脉外;(2)使用的器械除 PCB/UCB 外;(3)无法获得或重复数据。未施加语言、出版日期或状态限制。主要终点是靶病变血运重建。次要终点是:血管造影二元再狭窄和晚期管腔丢失以及全因死亡率。共有 4 项随机试验的 381 名患者入选(PCB 组,n=186 例与 UCB 组,n=195 例)。中位随访时间为 10.3 个月。与 UCB 血管成形术相比,PCB 治疗降低了靶病变血运重建(12.2%比 27.7%;比值比,0.22;95%置信区间,0.13-0.38;P<0.00001)、血管造影再狭窄(18.7%比 45.5%;比值比,0.26;95%置信区间,0.14-0.48;P<0.0001)和晚期管腔丢失(范围,-0.05 至 0.50mm 比 0.61-1.7mm;加权平均差异,-0.75mm;95%置信区间,-1.06 至-0.45;P<0.00001)。与 UCB 相比,PCB 治疗在死亡率方面无差异(2.1%比 3.2%;比值比,0.99;95%置信区间,0.39-2.49;P=0.98)。

结论

在股腘动脉疾病中,与 UCB 血管成形术相比,PCB 治疗具有更好的抗再狭窄效果,且无安全性差异的证据。

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