Suppr超能文献

MGuard支架与裸金属支架用于ST段抬高型心肌梗死的真实世界比较(REWARD-MI研究)

Real world comparison of the MGuard Stent versus the bare metal stent for ST elevation myocardial infarction (the REWARD-MI study).

作者信息

Fernández-Cisnal Agustín, Cid-Álvarez B, Álvarez-Álvarez B, Cubero-Gómez J M, Ocaranza-Sánchez R, López-Otero D, Souto-Castro P, Díaz de la Llera L S, Trillo-Nouche R, González-Juanatey J R

机构信息

Haemodynamic and Interventional Cardiology Unit, University Hospital Virgen del Rocío, Seville, Spain.

出版信息

Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Jan 1;85(1):E1-9. doi: 10.1002/ccd.25563. Epub 2014 Jun 17.

Abstract

AIM

The MGuard Stent (MGS) was designed to prevent distal embolization of thrombus and has been shown to improve microcirculation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, there are no real world data comparing it with the bare metal stent (BMS). The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy and safety of the MGS in STEMI in the real world compared to the BMS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In total, 262 patients were included from a single centre, of which 35.9% had an MGS implanted. Two groups of 79 patients were established after propensity score matching, and they were similar in terms of baseline and periprocedural variables. The mean follow-up was 321 ± 12.94 days. There was no difference in mortality (7.6% in both groups), major adverse cardiac events (20.3% vs. 12.7%, P = 0.198), non-cardiac mortality, or non-fatal myocardial infarction (6.3% in both groups). Target lesion revascularization (TLR) was significantly higher in the MGS group (11.4% (9) vs. 1.3% (1) P < 0.01; RR 10.02 [1.23-81.16]).

CONCLUSION

Our study is the first to compare the MGS with the BMS in STEMI in the real world, and it also appears to confirm that although the MGS is a safe device in STEMI that is not associated with increased mortality, it is associated with a higher long-term TLR rate. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

摘要

目的

MGuard支架(MGS)旨在预防血栓远端栓塞,并已被证明可改善ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者的微循环。然而,尚无真实世界数据将其与裸金属支架(BMS)进行比较。本研究的目的是在真实世界中确定MGS在STEMI患者中相对于BMS的疗效和安全性。

方法与结果

共纳入来自单一中心的262例患者,其中35.9%植入了MGS。倾向评分匹配后建立了两组各79例患者,两组在基线和围手术期变量方面相似。平均随访时间为321±12.94天。两组在死亡率(均为7.6%)、主要不良心脏事件(20.3%对12.7%,P = 0.198)、非心脏死亡率或非致命性心肌梗死(均为6.3%)方面无差异。MGS组的靶病变血运重建(TLR)显著更高(11.4%(9例)对1.3%(1例),P < 0.01;RR 10.02 [1.23 - 81.16])。

结论

我们的研究是首次在真实世界中将MGS与BMS用于STEMI患者进行比较,并且似乎也证实了尽管MGS在STEMI中是一种安全的装置,不会增加死亡率,但它与更高的长期TLR率相关。© 2014威利期刊公司。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验