Suppr超能文献

预测 COURAGE 试验(经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与强化药物治疗的临床结果评估)的结局:冠状动脉解剖与缺血。

Predicting outcome in the COURAGE trial (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation): coronary anatomy versus ischemia.

机构信息

University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program Coordinating Center, Connecticut VA Healthcare System, West Haven, Connecticut.

出版信息

JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Feb;7(2):195-201. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.10.017. Epub 2014 Jan 15.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine the relative utility of anatomic and ischemic burden of coronary artery disease for predicting outcomes.

BACKGROUND

Both anatomic burden and ischemic burden of coronary artery disease determine patient prognosis and influence myocardial revascularization decisions. When both measures are available, their relative utility for prognostication and management choice is controversial.

METHODS

A total of 621 patients enrolled in the COURAGE (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation) trial with baseline quantitative nuclear single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and quantitative coronary angiography were studied. Several multiple regression models were constructed to determine independent predictors of the endpoint of death, myocardial infarction (MI) (excluding periprocedural MI) and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS). Ischemic burden during stress SPECT, anatomic burden derived from angiography, left ventricular ejection fraction, and assignment to either optimal medical therapy (OMT) + percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or OMT alone were analyzed.

RESULTS

In nonadjusted and adjusted regression models, anatomic burden and left ventricular ejection fraction were consistent predictors of death, MI, and NSTE-ACS, whereas ischemic burden and treatment assignment were not. There was a marginal (p = 0.03) effect of the interaction term of anatomic and ischemic burden for the prediction of clinical outcome, but separately or in combination, neither anatomy nor ischemia interacted with therapeutic strategy to predict outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of patients treated with OMT, anatomic burden was a consistent predictor of death, MI, and NSTE-ACS, whereas ischemic burden was not. Importantly, neither determination, even in combination, identified a patient profile benefiting preferentially from an invasive therapeutic strategy. (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation [COURAGE]; NCT00007657).

摘要

目的

本研究旨在确定冠状动脉疾病的解剖学和缺血负担对预测结果的相对效用。

背景

冠状动脉疾病的解剖学负担和缺血负担都决定了患者的预后,并影响了心肌血运重建决策。当这两种测量方法都可用时,它们对预后和管理选择的相对效用存在争议。

方法

共纳入 621 例 COURAGE(经血管重建和强化药物评估的临床结果)试验中基线定量核单光子发射计算机断层扫描(SPECT)和定量冠状动脉造影的患者。构建了多个多元回归模型,以确定终点(死亡、心肌梗死[MI](不包括围手术期 MI)和非 ST 段抬高急性冠状动脉综合征[NSTE-ACS])的独立预测因素。对负荷 SPECT 检查中的缺血负担、血管造影得出的解剖学负担、左心室射血分数以及最佳药物治疗(OMT)+经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)或单独 OMT 治疗的分配进行了分析。

结果

在未经调整和调整后的回归模型中,解剖学负担和左心室射血分数是死亡、MI 和 NSTE-ACS 的一致预测因素,而缺血负担和治疗分配则不是。解剖学和缺血负担的交互项对临床结果的预测有边缘意义(p=0.03),但无论是单独还是联合,两者都没有与治疗策略相互作用来预测结果。

结论

在接受 OMT 治疗的患者队列中,解剖学负担是死亡、MI 和 NSTE-ACS 的一致预测因素,而缺血负担则不是。重要的是,即使将两种检查结合起来,也没有确定出哪种患者更受益于侵袭性治疗策略。(经血管重建和强化药物评估的临床结果[COURAGE];NCT00007657)。

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