Suppr超能文献

依维莫司洗脱支架与紫杉醇洗脱支架用于经皮冠状动脉介入治疗患者的长期临床结局:一项荟萃分析。

Long-term clinical outcomes of everolimus-eluting stent versus paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: a meta-analysis.

作者信息

Meng Min, Gao Bei, Wang Xia, Bai Zheng-gang, Sa Ri-Na, Ge Bin

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Donggang West Road No. 204, Lanzhou, Gansu, 730000, China.

Evidence-Based Medicine Center, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, 730000, China.

出版信息

BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2016 Feb 9;16:34. doi: 10.1186/s12872-016-0206-6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Everolimus -eluting stent (EES) is common used in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Our purpose is to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes of everolimus -eluting stent (EES) versus paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronaryinterventions (PCI) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP and relevant websites ( https://scholar-google-com.ezproxy.lib.usf.edu/ ) for articles to compare outcomes between everolimus-eluting stent and paclitaxel-eluting stent without language or date restriction. RCTs that compared the use of everolimus -eluting stent and paclitaxel-eluting stent in PCI were included. Variables relating to patient, study characteristics, and clinical endpoints were extracted. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software.

RESULTS

We identified 6 published studies (from three randomized trials) more on everolimus-eluting stent (n = 3352) than paclitaxel-eluting (n = 1639), with follow-up duration ranging from 3, 4 and 5 years. Three-year outcomes of everolimus-eluting stent compared to paclitaxel-eluting were as following: the everolimus-eluting stent significantly reduced all-cause death (relative risk [RR]:0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46. to 0.82), MACE (RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.77), MI (RR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.86), TLR (RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.88), ID-TLR (RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.92) and ST (RR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.90). There was no difference in TVR between the everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting (RR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.10); Four-year outcomes of everolimus-eluting compared to paclitaxel-eluting: the everolimus-eluting significantly reduced MACE (RR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.98) and ID-TLR (RR: 0.47; 95 % CI: 0.23 to 0.97). There was no difference in MI (RR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.16 to 1.46), TLR (RR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.20 to 1.04) and ST ((RR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.05 to 2.39). Five-year outcomes of everolimus-eluting stent compared to paclitaxel-eluting: There was no difference in ID-TLR (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.02) and ST (RR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.28 to 1.80).

CONCLUSIONS

In the present meta-analysis, everolimus-eluting appeared to be safe and clinically effective in patients undergoing PCI in comparison to PES in 3-year clinical outcomes; there was similar no difference in reduction of ST between EES and PES in long-term(≥ 4 years) clinical follow-ups. Everolimus-eluting is more safety than paclitaxel-eluting in long-term clinical follow-ups, whether these effects can be applied to different patient subgroups warrants further investigation.

摘要

背景

依维莫司洗脱支架(EES)常用于接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的患者。我们的目的是在随机对照试验(RCT)中评估接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的患者使用依维莫司洗脱支架(EES)与紫杉醇洗脱支架(PES)的长期临床结局。

方法

我们检索了Medline、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、中国知网、维普资讯以及相关网站(https://scholar-google-com.ezproxy.lib.usf.edu/),以查找比较依维莫司洗脱支架和紫杉醇洗脱支架结局的文章,无语言或日期限制。纳入比较在PCI中使用依维莫司洗脱支架和紫杉醇洗脱支架的RCT。提取与患者、研究特征和临床终点相关的变量。使用RevMan 5.2软件进行荟萃分析。

结果

我们确定了6项已发表的研究(来自三项随机试验),更多关于依维莫司洗脱支架(n = 3352)而非紫杉醇洗脱支架(n = 1639),随访时间为3年、4年和5年。与紫杉醇洗脱支架相比,依维莫司洗脱支架的三年结局如下:依维莫司洗脱支架显著降低全因死亡(相对风险[RR]:0.63;95%置信区间[CI]:0.46至0.82)、主要不良心血管事件(MACE,RR:0.56;95% CI:0.41至0.77)、心肌梗死(MI,RR:0.64;95% CI:0.48至0.86)、靶病变血运重建(TLR,RR:0.72;95% CI:0.59至0.88)、缺血驱动的靶病变血运重建(ID-TLR,RR:0.74;95% CI:0.59至0.92)和支架血栓形成(ST,RR:0.54;95% CI:0.32至0.90)。依维莫司洗脱支架与紫杉醇洗脱支架之间的靶血管血运重建(TVR)无差异(RR:0.76;95% CI:0.58至1.10);与紫杉醇洗脱支架相比,依维莫司洗脱支架的四年结局:依维莫司洗脱支架显著降低MACE(RR:0.44;95% CI:0.18至0.98)和ID-TLR(RR:0.47;95% CI:0.

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9c0b/4748592/97314e5dbae1/12872_2016_206_Fig1_HTML.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