Hou Xu-Min, Han Wen-Zheng, Qiu Xing-Biao, Chen Hui, Fang Wei-Yi
Department of Cardiology , Shanghai Chest Hospital , Shanghai , China.
Heart Asia. 2013 Jan 24;5(1):101-5. doi: 10.1136/heartasia-2013-010316. eCollection 2013.
Off-label use of drug-eluting stents (DES) is more common than on-label use and may be associated with a persistently higher rate of adverse angiographic and clinical outcomes.
To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of unrestricted use of DES in everyday practice in a Chinese population.
Between January 2004 and May 2009, we retrospectively enrolled 1209 consecutive patients who received DES in our single centre. 84.7% of patients were treated with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and 15.3% of patients were treated with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES).
59.0% of patients (n=713) were treated for off-label indications, with a significantly higher proportion of patients with previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (6.2% vs 0.6%, p<0.001). There were no differences in coronary risk factors. During 6-66 months' follow-up, the rate of repeat target vessel revascularisation (TVR) was significantly higher in the off-label group (14.6% vs 9.7%, p=0.011). The risk of death and myocardial infarction were not statistically different with off-label from standard use. Multivariate logistic regression showed that the independent predictors of TVR were stent type (SES vs PES, HR=0.567, 95% CI 0.395 to 0.813), previous CABG (HR=2.393, 95% CI 1.440 to 3.977), the treatment of chronic total occlusion (HR=2.786, 95% CI 1.731 to 4.484) and the treatment of left main lesion (HR=1.854, 95% CI 1.022 to 3.363).
In our local unselected cohort of Chinese people, off-label use of DES was safe in comparison with on-label use and associated with an excellent procedural success rate, but higher TVR.
药物洗脱支架(DES)的非标签使用比标签使用更为常见,且可能与血管造影和临床不良结局的持续较高发生率相关。
评估在中国人群的日常实践中 unrestricted 使用 DES 的安全性和有效性。
在2004年1月至2009年5月期间,我们回顾性纳入了在我们单中心接受 DES 的1209例连续患者。84.7%的患者接受西罗莫司洗脱支架(SES)治疗,15.3%的患者接受紫杉醇洗脱支架(PES)治疗。
59.0%的患者(n = 713)因非标签适应症接受治疗,既往有冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的患者比例显著更高(6.2%对0.6%,p < 0.001)。冠状动脉危险因素无差异。在6至66个月的随访期间,非标签组的再次靶血管血运重建(TVR)率显著更高(14.6%对9.7%,p = 0.011)。非标签使用与标准使用相比,死亡和心肌梗死风险无统计学差异。多因素逻辑回归显示,TVR 的独立预测因素为支架类型(SES 对 PES,HR = 0.567,95%CI 0.395至0.813)、既往 CABG(HR = 2.393,95%CI 1.440至3.977)、慢性完全闭塞的治疗(HR = 2.786,95%CI 1.731至4.484)和左主干病变的治疗(HR = 1.854,95%CI 1.022至3.363)。
在我们当地未选择的中国人群队列中,DES 的非标签使用与标签使用相比是安全的,且与优异的手术成功率相关,但 TVR 更高。