稳定型心绞痛患者的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(ORBITA):一项双盲、随机对照试验。

Percutaneous coronary intervention in stable angina (ORBITA): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

机构信息

Imperial College London, London, UK; Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.

Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.

出版信息

Lancet. 2018 Jan 6;391(10115):31-40. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32714-9. Epub 2017 Nov 2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic relief is the primary goal of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in stable angina and is commonly observed clinically. However, there is no evidence from blinded, placebo-controlled randomised trials to show its efficacy.

METHODS

ORBITA is a blinded, multicentre randomised trial of PCI versus a placebo procedure for angina relief that was done at five study sites in the UK. We enrolled patients with severe (≥70%) single-vessel stenoses. After enrolment, patients received 6 weeks of medication optimisation. Patients then had pre-randomisation assessments with cardiopulmonary exercise testing, symptom questionnaires, and dobutamine stress echocardiography. Patients were randomised 1:1 to undergo PCI or a placebo procedure by use of an automated online randomisation tool. After 6 weeks of follow-up, the assessments done before randomisation were repeated at the final assessment. The primary endpoint was difference in exercise time increment between groups. All analyses were based on the intention-to-treat principle and the study population contained all participants who underwent randomisation. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02062593.

FINDINGS

ORBITA enrolled 230 patients with ischaemic symptoms. After the medication optimisation phase and between Jan 6, 2014, and Aug 11, 2017, 200 patients underwent randomisation, with 105 patients assigned PCI and 95 assigned the placebo procedure. Lesions had mean area stenosis of 84·4% (SD 10·2), fractional flow reserve of 0·69 (0·16), and instantaneous wave-free ratio of 0·76 (0·22). There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of exercise time increment between groups (PCI minus placebo 16·6 s, 95% CI -8·9 to 42·0, p=0·200). There were no deaths. Serious adverse events included four pressure-wire related complications in the placebo group, which required PCI, and five major bleeding events, including two in the PCI group and three in the placebo group.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with medically treated angina and severe coronary stenosis, PCI did not increase exercise time by more than the effect of a placebo procedure. The efficacy of invasive procedures can be assessed with a placebo control, as is standard for pharmacotherapy.

FUNDING

NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, Foundation for Circulatory Health, Imperial College Healthcare Charity, Philips Volcano, NIHR Barts Biomedical Research Centre.

摘要

背景

在稳定型心绞痛患者中,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的主要目标是缓解症状,这在临床上是常见的。然而,目前尚无盲法、安慰剂对照随机试验的证据表明其疗效。

方法

ORBITA 是一项在英国五个研究地点进行的针对缓解心绞痛的 PCI 与安慰剂治疗的盲法、多中心随机试验。我们纳入了严重(≥70%)单支血管狭窄的患者。入组后,患者接受 6 周的药物优化治疗。然后,患者在随机分组前进行心肺运动试验、症状问卷和多巴酚丁胺超声心动图评估。患者以 1:1 的比例通过自动在线随机分组工具被随机分为 PCI 组或安慰剂组。在 6 周的随访后,在最终评估时重复随机分组前的评估。主要终点是两组间运动时间增量的差异。所有分析均基于意向治疗原则,研究人群包含所有接受随机分组的参与者。本研究在 ClinicalTrials.gov 注册,编号为 NCT02062593。

结果

ORBITA 纳入了 230 例有缺血症状的患者。在药物优化阶段和 2014 年 1 月 6 日至 2017 年 8 月 11 日之间,200 例患者接受了随机分组,其中 105 例患者被分配至 PCI 组,95 例患者被分配至安慰剂组。病变的平均面积狭窄为 84.4%(标准差 10.2),血流储备分数为 0.69(0.16),瞬时无波比为 0.76(0.22)。两组间运动时间增量的主要终点无显著差异(PCI 组减去安慰剂组 16.6 s,95%CI -8.9 至 42.0,p=0.200)。无死亡事件。严重不良事件包括安慰剂组 4 例与压力导丝相关的并发症,需要 PCI 治疗,以及 5 例大出血事件,其中 2 例发生在 PCI 组,3 例发生在安慰剂组。

结论

在接受药物治疗的心绞痛患者和严重冠状动脉狭窄患者中,PCI 组的运动时间增量并不超过安慰剂组。对于有创性治疗,可以使用安慰剂对照来评估其疗效,这与药物治疗的标准一致。

资金来源

NIHR 帝国理工学院生物医学研究中心、循环健康基金会、帝国理工学院医疗慈善基金会、飞利浦 Volcano、NIHR 巴茨生物医学研究中心。

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