Suppr超能文献

经皮冠状动脉介入治疗联合第二代药物洗脱支架治疗左主干与非左主干分叉病变患者的临床和血管造影结果比较

Clinical and Angiographic Outcomes Comparison of Patients With Left Main Vs Non-Left Main Bifurcation Lesions Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents.

作者信息

Vergara Ruben, Valenti Renato, Migliorini Angela, Ciabatti Michele, Grazia De Gregorio Maria, Taborchi Giulia, Morini Sofia, Rondine Roberto, Martone Raffaelle, Antoniucci David

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, Careggi Hospital, Viale Pieraccini 17, I-50134, Florence, Italy. ruben.arg@ gmail.com.

出版信息

J Invasive Cardiol. 2018 Dec;30(12):443-446.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

It is not clear if differences exist about treating left main bifurcation (LMB) and non-left main bifurcation (non-LMB) lesions by means of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

We prospectively analyzed all consecutive patients treated at our center for bifurcation lesions from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2015, including acute myocardial infarction (MI) and cardiogenic shock, and compared the angiographic and clinical outcomes of patients with LMB and non-LMB lesions treated with PCI and second-generation drug-eluting stent (2G-DES) implantation. The primary endpoint was the major adverse cardiac event (MACE) composite, including MI, clinically indicated target-vessel revascularization (TVR), and cardiac death (CD) at 2-year follow-up. We also compared the angiographic patency of the vessel, which was a composite of the restenosis-reocclusion (RR) rate.

RESULTS

Out of 1081 patients (1368 bifurcations), a total of 320 patients had LMB (29%). Overall, procedural success was 98.4%. Clinical follow-up rate was 100%. Angiographic follow-up rate was 83.7%. No differences were seen regarding the primary endpoint of all MACE (17.8% in LMB vs 18.0% in non-LMB; P>.99), MI rate (4.3% in LMB vs 2.9% in non-LMB; P=.20), and CD (8.7% in LMB vs 5.8% in non-LMB; P=.08). The overall RR rate was 11.8%, with 5% RR rate in the LMB group (16/320 lesions) and 9.7% RR rate in the non-LMB group (102/1048 lesions); P<.01. The LMB group had a better TVR rate (5.0% vs 9.4% in the non-LMB group; P=.01).

CONCLUSION

PCI with 2G-DES for LMB has better target-vessel patency and TVR rates when compared with non-LMB lesions, without clinical differences in terms of 2-year clinical outcomes.

摘要

引言

经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)在治疗左主干分叉(LMB)病变和非左主干分叉(non-LMB)病变方面是否存在差异尚不清楚。

方法

我们前瞻性分析了2011年1月1日至2015年12月31日在本中心接受治疗的所有连续性分叉病变患者,包括急性心肌梗死(MI)和心源性休克患者,并比较了接受PCI和植入第二代药物洗脱支架(2G-DES)的LMB病变和non-LMB病变患者的血管造影和临床结果。主要终点是主要不良心脏事件(MACE)复合终点,包括2年随访时的MI、临床指征的靶血管血运重建(TVR)和心源性死亡(CD)。我们还比较了血管造影的通畅情况,即再狭窄-再闭塞(RR)率的复合终点。

结果

在1081例患者(1368个分叉病变)中,共有320例患者患有LMB病变(29%)。总体而言,手术成功率为98.4%。临床随访率为100%。血管造影随访率为83.7%。在所有MACE的主要终点方面未见差异(LMB病变组为17.8%,non-LMB病变组为18.0%;P>.99),MI发生率(LMB病变组为4.3%,non-LMB病变组为2.9%;P = 0.20),以及CD发生率(LMB病变组为8.7%,non-LMB病变组为5.8%;P = 0.08)。总体RR率为11.8%,LMB病变组的RR率为5%(16/320个病变),non-LMB病变组的RR率为9.7%(102/1048个病变);P < 0.01。LMB病变组的TVR率更好(5.0%对比non-LMB病变组的9.4%;P = 0.01)。

结论

与non-LMB病变相比,采用2G-DES治疗LMB病变时具有更好的靶血管通畅率和TVR率,在2年临床结局方面无临床差异。

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