• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

多支冠状动脉疾病患者对冠状动脉搭桥术或分期经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的偏好。

Patients' preferences for coronary bypass grafting or staged percutaneous coronary intervention in multi-vessel coronary artery disease.

作者信息

Ohlow Marc-Alexander, Farah Ahmed, Kuntze Thomas, Lauer Bernward

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Zentralklinik, Bad Berka, Germany.

Medizinische Klinik III, Klinikum Westfalen, Dortmund, Germany.

出版信息

Int J Clin Pract. 2018 Apr;72(4):e13056. doi: 10.1111/ijcp.13056. Epub 2018 Jan 9.

DOI:10.1111/ijcp.13056
PMID:29316058
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The decision for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease (mCAD) is currently made by a heart-team approach. Patients' preference is less well investigated.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with prior CABG and at least 2 PCI procedures were interviewed whether they would elect bypass surgery or staged PCI in case of a hypothetical scenario in which they had mCAD and CABG or PCI will equally improve symptoms and survival.

RESULTS

A total 213 patients were surveyed. About 21 (10%) patients had multiple CABG, and mean number of PCI per patient was 4.0 ± 2.7. Complications during CABG were reported in 19.7% and in 14% after PCI, respectively. About 15% experienced complications after both CABG and PCI, and 51% had no complications at all. Mean symptom-free period was 5.2 (following CABG) vs 1.8 years (following PCI); P<.001. Duration of recovery was significant shorter after PCI (mean 9.2 ± 1.2 vs 136.4 ± 57.9 days; P<.01). Based on their personal experience with both procedures, 15% of the participants elected CABG in the hypothetical scenario and 67% choose staged PCI, 18% were equally happy with either. More participants preferred PCI when age was ≥70, complications following CABG occurred, and when undergoing CABG first. Gender, number of CABG or PCI procedures per patient, and complications following PCI did not affect participants' preference.

CONCLUSIONS

In our hypothetical scenario, the majority of participants preferred staged PCI over CABG. Preferences were related to age, complications following CABG, and whether CABG was performed first.

摘要

背景

目前,多支冠状动脉疾病(mCAD)患者的冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)或经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)决策是通过心脏团队方法做出的。对患者偏好的研究较少。

方法

对所有既往接受过CABG且至少接受过2次PCI手术的连续患者进行访谈,询问在假设他们患有mCAD且CABG或PCI能同等程度改善症状和生存的情况下,他们会选择搭桥手术还是分期PCI。

结果

共调查了213例患者。约21例(10%)患者接受过多次CABG,每位患者的PCI平均次数为4.0±2.7次。CABG期间的并发症发生率分别为19.7%,PCI术后为14%。约15%的患者在CABG和PCI后均出现并发症,51%的患者根本没有并发症。无症状期平均为5.2年(CABG后)对1.8年(PCI后);P<0.001。PCI后的恢复时间明显更短(平均9.2±1.2天对136.4±57.9天;P<0.01)。基于他们对这两种手术的个人经验,15%的参与者在假设情况下选择CABG, 67%选择分期PCI,18%对两者同样满意。当年龄≥70岁、CABG后出现并发症以及首次接受CABG时,更多参与者更喜欢PCI。性别、每位患者的CABG或PCI手术次数以及PCI后的并发症不影响参与者的偏好。

结论

在我们的假设情况下,大多数参与者更喜欢分期PCI而非CABG。偏好与年龄、CABG后的并发症以及是否首先进行CABG有关。

相似文献

1
Patients' preferences for coronary bypass grafting or staged percutaneous coronary intervention in multi-vessel coronary artery disease.多支冠状动脉疾病患者对冠状动脉搭桥术或分期经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的偏好。
Int J Clin Pract. 2018 Apr;72(4):e13056. doi: 10.1111/ijcp.13056. Epub 2018 Jan 9.
2
Patient preferences for coronary artery bypass graft surgery or percutaneous intervention in multivessel coronary artery disease.多支冠状动脉疾病患者对冠状动脉旁路移植术或经皮介入治疗的偏好。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Aug 1;82(2):212-8. doi: 10.1002/ccd.24399. Epub 2013 May 6.
3
A case-vignette based assessment of patient's perspective on coronary revascularization strategies, the OPINION study.一项基于病例 vignette 的关于患者对冠状动脉血运重建策略观点的评估,即 OPINION 研究。
J Cardiol. 2018 Aug;72(2):149-154. doi: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2018.01.009. Epub 2018 Mar 1.
4
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Native Coronary Arteries Versus Bypass Grafts in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗在既往冠状动脉旁路移植术患者中的应用:来自退伍军人事务部临床评估、报告和跟踪计划的见解。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 May 9;9(9):884-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.01.034. Epub 2016 Apr 13.
5
Adverse events following percutaneous and surgical coronary revascularisation: Analysis of non-MACE outcomes in the Stent or Surgery (SoS) Trial.经皮冠状动脉血运重建术和外科冠状动脉血运重建术后的不良事件:支架或手术(SoS)试验中的非重大不良心血管事件结局分析
Int J Cardiol. 2016 Jan 1;202:7-12. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.08.135. Epub 2015 Aug 18.
6
Clinical characteristics and early mortality of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting compared to percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the Australasian Society of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeons (ASCTS) and the Melbourne Interventional Group (MIG) Registries.与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗相比,冠状动脉旁路移植术患者的临床特征和早期死亡率:来自澳大利亚和新西兰心脏与胸外科医师协会(ASCTS)和墨尔本介入治疗组(MIG)登记处的见解。
Heart Lung Circ. 2009 Jun;18(3):184-90. doi: 10.1016/j.hlc.2008.10.005. Epub 2009 Mar 5.
7
Analysis of stroke occurring in the SYNTAX trial comparing coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention in the treatment of complex coronary artery disease.SYNTAX 试验中发生的卒中分析:冠状动脉旁路移植术与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗治疗复杂冠状动脉疾病的比较。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Apr;6(4):344-54. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2012.11.010. Epub 2013 Mar 20.
8
Description of a Heart Team approach to coronary revascularization and its beneficial long-term effect on clinical events after PCI.心脏团队冠状动脉血运重建方法及其对PCI术后临床事件的长期有益影响的描述。
Clin Res Cardiol. 2016 May;105(5):388-400. doi: 10.1007/s00392-015-0932-2. Epub 2015 Oct 27.
9
Comparison of Five-Year Outcome of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Triple-Vessel Coronary Artery Disease (from the Coronary Revascularization Demonstrating Outcome Study in Kyoto PCI/CABG Registry Cohort-2).经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗三支血管冠状动脉疾病的五年疗效比较(来自京都经皮冠状动脉介入治疗/冠状动脉旁路移植术注册队列-2的冠状动脉血运重建疗效研究)
Am J Cardiol. 2015 Jul 1;116(1):59-65. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.03.040. Epub 2015 Apr 7.
10
Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Graft in Aged Patients With Unprotected Left Main Artery Lesions.老年无保护左主干病变患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术的比较
Int Heart J. 2016 Dec 2;57(6):682-688. doi: 10.1536/ihj.15-420. Epub 2016 Nov 9.

引用本文的文献

1
Outcomes Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Multivessel Disease Who Were Recommended for But Declined Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery.多支血管病变患者行冠状动脉介入治疗后结局:推荐行冠状动脉旁路移植术,但患者拒绝。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2024 Jun 4;13(11):e033931. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.123.033931. Epub 2024 May 31.
2
Impacts of the SYNTAX score I, II and SYNTAX score II 2020 on left main revascularization.SYNTAX 评分 I、II 和 SYNTAX 评分 II 2020 对左主干血运重建的影响。
Sci Rep. 2024 Jan 11;14(1):1073. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-51192-7.
3
The clinical value and cost-effectiveness of treatments for patients with coronary artery disease.
冠心病患者治疗的临床价值及成本效益
Health Econ Rev. 2022 Nov 8;12(1):56. doi: 10.1186/s13561-022-00401-y.
4
Trends in Reoperative Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery for Older Adults in the United States, 1998 to 2017.1998 年至 2017 年美国老年患者再次冠状动脉旁路移植术的趋势。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Oct 20;9(20):e016980. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.016980. Epub 2020 Oct 13.
5
Clinical practice patterns in revascularization of diabetic patients with coronary heart disease: nationwide register study.冠心病合并糖尿病患者血运重建的临床实践模式:全国登记研究。
Ann Med. 2020 Aug;52(5):225-232. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2020.1771757. Epub 2020 Jun 2.
6
Individualizing Revascularization Strategy for Diabetic Patients With Multivessel Coronary Disease.个体化多血管病变糖尿病患者的血运重建策略。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Oct 22;74(16):2074-2084. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.07.083.
7
Impact of Hierarchy on Multidisciplinary Heart-Team Recommendations in Patients with Isolated Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease.层级制度对孤立性多支冠状动脉疾病患者多学科心脏团队建议的影响
J Clin Med. 2019 Sep 19;8(9):1490. doi: 10.3390/jcm8091490.