Suppr超能文献

一项在适合行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的冠状动脉疾病患者中比较 Promus 依维莫司洗脱支架和 Taxus Liberte 紫杉醇洗脱支架系统的前瞻性、随机对照研究:PROMISE 研究。

A prospective, randomized comparison of promus everolimus-eluting and TAXUS Liberte paclitaxel-eluting stent systems in patients with coronary artery disease eligible for percutaneous coronary intervention: the PROMISE study.

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, Yeungnam University Medical Center, Daegu, Korea.

出版信息

J Korean Med Sci. 2013 Nov;28(11):1609-14. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2013.28.11.1609. Epub 2013 Oct 31.

Abstract

We aimed comparing two-year clinical outcomes of the Everolimus-Eluting Promus and Paclitaxel-Eluting TAXUS Liberte stents used in routine clinical practice. Patients with objective evidence of ischemia and coronary artery disease eligible for PCI were prospectively randomized to everolimus-eluting stent (EES) or paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) groups. The primary end-point was ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (TVR) at 2 yr after intervention, and the secondary end-point was a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), such as death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), TVR or stent thrombosis. A total of 850 patients with 1,039 lesions was randomized to the EES (n=425) and PES (n=425) groups. Ischemic-driven TVR at 2 yr was 3.8% in the PES and 1.2% in the EES group (P for non-inferiority=0.021). MACE rates were significantly different; 5.6% in PES and 2.5% in EES (P = 0.027). Rates of MI (0.8% in PES vs 0.2% in EES, P = 0.308), all deaths (1.5% in PES vs 1.2% in EES, P = 0.739) and stent thrombosis (0.3% in PES vs 0.7% in EES, P = 0.325) were similar. The clinical outcomes of EES are superior to PES, mainly due to a reduction in the rate of ischemia-driven TVR.

摘要

我们旨在比较依维莫司洗脱 Promus 支架和紫杉醇洗脱 Taxus Liberte 支架在常规临床实践中的两年临床结果。有客观缺血证据且适合经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的患者前瞻性随机分为依维莫司洗脱支架(EES)或紫杉醇洗脱支架(PES)组。主要终点是介入后 2 年缺血驱动的靶血管血运重建(TVR),次要终点是主要不良心脏事件(MACE),如死亡、心肌梗死(MI)、靶病变血运重建(TLR)、TVR 或支架血栓形成。共有 850 例 1039 处病变的患者被随机分为 EES(n=425)和 PES(n=425)组。PES 组 2 年时缺血驱动的 TVR 为 3.8%,EES 组为 1.2%(非劣效性 P=0.021)。MACE 发生率有显著差异;PES 组为 5.6%,EES 组为 2.5%(P=0.027)。PES 组 MI 发生率(0.8%比 0.2%,P=0.308)、所有死亡(1.5%比 1.2%,P=0.739)和支架血栓形成(0.3%比 0.7%,P=0.325)发生率相似。EES 的临床结果优于 PES,主要是由于缺血驱动的 TVR 率降低。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b866/3835502/55507fdf4b27/jkms-28-1609-g001.jpg

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