Suppr超能文献

药物洗脱球囊治疗初发冠状动脉病变:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析

Drug-eluting balloons in the treatment of de-novo coronary lesions: a meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials.

作者信息

Li Ying, Wang Cuancuan, Zuo Guoxing, Wang Kuan, Cao Zhongnan, Du Xinping

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Tianjin Fifth Central Hospital, Tianjin, China.

出版信息

Coron Artery Dis. 2016 Sep;27(6):467-77. doi: 10.1097/MCA.0000000000000372.

Abstract

AIM

The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) plus bare-metal stents (BMS) for the treatment of de-novo coronary lesions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Eleven trials involving 1279 patients were included in this study. The main endpoints were as follows: late lumen loss (LLL), binary restenosis, stent thrombosis (ST), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). The definition of MACEs was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR). Compared with BMS alone, DEB plus BMS showed a lower risk for LLL (P=0.007) and MACEs (P=0.010). There were no significant differences in binary restenosis (P=0.212), ST (P=0.199), death (P=0.141), MI (P=0.439), and TLR (P=0.340). Compared with drug-eluting stents (DES), DEB plus BMS could increase the risk of LLL (P=0.002) and MACEs (P=0.026). The risks of binary restenosis (P=0.113), ST (P=0.832), death (P=0.115), MI (P=0.831), and TLR (P=0.111) were similar between DEB plus BMS and DES.

CONCLUSION

DEB plus BMS was better than BMS alone in reducing LLL and MACEs, especially when dilatation was performed after stenting for de-novo coronary lesions, but it was inferior to DES. Therefore, the treatment strategy with DEB plus BMS should not be recommended for de-novo coronary lesions, except for patients who have contraindications for DES.

摘要

目的

本荟萃分析旨在评估药物洗脱球囊(DEB)联合裸金属支架(BMS)治疗初发冠状动脉病变的疗效。

方法与结果

本研究纳入了11项试验,涉及1279例患者。主要终点如下:晚期管腔丢失(LLL)、二元再狭窄、支架内血栓形成(ST)和主要不良心血管事件(MACE)。MACE的定义为死亡、心肌梗死(MI)和靶病变血运重建(TLR)的复合事件。与单纯BMS相比,DEB联合BMS显示出较低的LLL风险(P = 0.007)和MACE风险(P = 0.010)。二元再狭窄(P = 0.212)、ST(P = 0.199)、死亡(P = 0.141)、MI(P = 0.439)和TLR(P = 0.340)方面无显著差异。与药物洗脱支架(DES)相比,DEB联合BMS会增加LLL风险(P = 0.002)和MACE风险(P = 0.026)。DEB联合BMS与DES之间的二元再狭窄(P = 0.113)、ST(P = 0.832)、死亡(P = 0.115)、MI(P = 0.831)和TLR(P = 0.111)风险相似。

结论

DEB联合BMS在降低LLL和MACE方面优于单纯BMS,尤其是在初发冠状动脉病变支架置入后进行扩张时,但不如DES。因此,除了有DES禁忌证的患者外,不建议将DEB联合BMS的治疗策略用于初发冠状动脉病变。

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